Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> Legal Theory Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Academic
: Legal Theory BlogBradley on "Knock & Talk"
By Lawrence Solum
Craig Bradley (Indiana University School of Law-Bloomington) has posted 'Knock and Talk' and the Fourth Amendment (Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 84, No. 4, 2009) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
"Knock and talk" is a technique employed by police, in theory, to make legitimate inquiries about alleged criminal activities by knocking on people's doors and talking to them about the allegations. In fact, it is used to check out yards and to get views (and smells) from the inside of houses, as well as to locate potential arrestees, without probable cause or a warrant. If the information thus obtained amounts to probable cause, either to search or arrest, the police then claim "exigent circumstances," enter the house, search, arrest, and search further incident to arrest, all without a warrant. Although the Supreme Court clearly disapproved of this sort of activity in 1948 in Johnson v, United States, 333 U.S. 10, that case has been largely ignored by the courts of appeal, which have widely approved of "knock and talk." The Supreme Court has not addressed this subject since Johnson. This article reviews the many cases on this issue and suggests some possible limits on the police.
Full post as published by Legal Theory Blog on January 27, 2009 (boomark / email).

CRIMINAL: "Knock and talk" procedures by police: ERIC QUINTANA v. COM. (SC 10/23/2008)
Knock-and-talk led to officer smelling a meth lab
Sounds from inside after the knock of a knock and talk did not justify entry
KY: "Come on in" in response to knock-and-talk request to search is consent
FL-1: Ruse for 3 a.m. knock-and-talk did not make consent involuntary








