Legal Opinion

People v. Murphy

California Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 2005No. S125572PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CHIN, J.

We consider whether the circumstances in this case afforded sufficient exigency to justify a police entry to conduct a search of a residence without complying with the usual “knock-notice” rule, to prevent destruction of evidence. We conclude the “no-knock” entry was justified by the circumstances, which included (1) contemporaneous, ongoing illegal drug sales on the premises, raising the reasonable inference that more drugs were inside, (2) the officers’ knowledge that defendant was on probation for a drug offense and had consented to a warrantless search of her premises, (3)…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Richards v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. People v. Lance W.California Supreme Court · 1985
  3. People v. MaddoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  4. United States v. BanksSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  5. People v. DumasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. People v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  2. People v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  3. People v. OlguinCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  4. People v. OlguinCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  5. People v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API