Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Vargas

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided November 9, 2006No. 24,880Published

1DissentWechsler, Judge

{35} I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. I agree with the majority that announcement is preferable. I also agree with the majority’s discussion of the history, importance, and purpose of the knock-and-announce rule, but I conclude that the ultimate test, reasonableness, was met in this case. The majority opinion appears to create a bright-line rule of announcement before officers make any entry beyond a doorway. But see, e.g., State v. Duran, 2005-NMSC-034, ¶ 34, 138 N.M. 414, 120 P.3d 836 (“Our case law has consistently disfavored a bright-line test in analyzing Fourth…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Ker v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Richards v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. Sabbath v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  4. State v. ChamberlainNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. DuranNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2005

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

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

Powered by the Exa API