Wilson v. Arkansas Case Brief

Wilson v. Arkansas, 115 S.Ct. 1914(1995)

FACTS: Arkansas State Police officers sought a warrant to search the home of Jacobs, a suspected drug dealer. They had probable cause, in that an informant had purchased drugs in the home. At that sale, the petitioner, Sharlene Wilson, had waved a pistol in the informants face and threatened to kill her if she were an informant. The affidavit set forth the essential facts, and noted that Jacobs had previous convictions for arson and firebombing. The warrant was issued, and officers went to the house. On arrival at the house, the officers found the door unlocked and walked in without knocking. As they entered, they announced themselves as police and that they had a warrant. Evidence was seized, and Jacobs and Wilson were arrested. Wilson tried to have the evidence seized in the home suppressed on various grounds, including the fact that the officers had failed to “knock and announce” before entering and that therefore the search was unreasonable. The motion was denied, and the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed on appeal. Wilson then appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court.

ISSUE: Is entering a dwelling to serve a warrant unreasonable when officers do not knock and announce first and they have not established a risk either to themselves or of evidence destruction justifying an unannounced entry?

HOLDING: Yes.

DISCUSSION: The Court observed that it has long been a tradition of the common law that officers seeking to invade a dwelling with a warrant must knock and announce their presence. Since knock and announce was the rule at the time of the adoption of the Fourth Amendment the framers would have been well aware of that and would have considered it to be part of the inquiry as to whether a search was reasonable or not. Not every entry must be preceded by an announcement. To get a “no knock” warrant, officers must state sufficient facts in their supporting affidavits to permit a neutral and detached magistrate to conclude that knock and announce would create an unreasonable risk of peril for the officers or destruction of the evidence sought to be seized with the warrant. In the majority of cases, however, entry with first knocking and announcing will be an unreasonable search, and any evidence seized will be suppressed.