We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
DON'T KNOCK THEM UNTIL WE TRY THEM: CIVIL SUITS AS A REMEDY FOR KNOCK-AND-ANNOUNCE VIOLATIONS AFTER Hudson v. Michigan, 126 S. Ct. 2159 (2006).
- Authors
Papik, Jonathan
- Abstract
The article focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court case Hudson versus Michigan which dealt with knock-and-announce violations committed by police. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari after the conviction of defendant Booker T. Hudson. Justice Antonin Scalia held that the exclusionary rule is not the appropriate remedy for such violations. It cites that civil torts suit may be the best remedy for such violations. It also mentions the complaint raised against civil remedies.
- Subjects
UNITED States; HUDSON v. Michigan (Supreme Court case); HUDSON, Booker T.; SEARCHES &; seizures (Law); EXCLUSIONARY rule (Evidence); TORTS; CIVIL procedure; UNITED States. Supreme Court; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law)
- Publication
Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 2006, Vol 30, Issue 1, p417
- ISSN
0193-4872
- Publication type
Article