About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

161 U. Pa. L. Rev. PENNumbra 1 (2012)

handle is hein.journals/pennumbra161 and id is 1 raw text is: CASE NOTE KNOCK, LISTEN, THEN BREAK THE DOOR DOWN? THE POLICE-CREATED EXIGENCY DOCTRINE AFTER KENTUCKY v. KING RACHEL LEVICK- In an effort to curtail the excesses of the general warrant and to protect Americans and their private property,2 the authors of the Bill of Rights in the Fourth Amendment conditioned the issuance of war- rants on the presence of probable cause. Though this language has been construed to require such a warrant for most searches of the home, the Supreme Court has identified several exceptions to this rule, including the exigent circumstances exception. Where the exigencies of the situation make the needs of law enforcement so compelling that [a] warrantless search is objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, a warrantless search is constitutional? In an t Senior Editor, Volume 161, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. J.D. Candidate, 2013, University of Pennsylvania Law School; B.A., 2010, University of Pennsylvania. My most sincere thanks to D. Benjamin Thomas and Erin Borek for their diligent work in preparing this piece for publication, and to David Dorey for his guidance, insight, and assistance during the writing process. See Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 583 (1980) ([I]ndiscriminate searches and seizures conducted under the authority of 'general warrants' were the immediate evils that motivated the framing and adoption of the Fourth Amendment.). 2 See id. at 585 (The simple language of the Amendment applies equally to seizures of persons and to seizures of property.). U.S. CONST. amend. IV. See e.g., Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 393-94 (1978) ([W]arrents are generally required to search a person's home or his person. . . .). Id. at 394 (internal quotation marks omitted). The Supreme Court has identified several such exigencies, including the need to provide emergency medical aid, the hot pursuit of a fleeing suspect, and the prevention of imminent destruction of evidence. Kentucky v. King, 131 S. Ct. 1849, 1856 (2011). (1)

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most