District of Columbia v. Mancouso
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
STEADMAN, Associate Judge:
The police, executing a search warrant, entered the house where appellees reside without complying with the “knock and announce” requirement of D.C.Code § 23-524(a) (1996 Repl.). Neither appellee was inside the house at the time but both were in the immediate vicinity and within “earshot” and “eyeshot,” had the police complied with the statute. The principal issue before us in this pretrial government appeal is whether the trial court was correct in ruling that the appellees had standing to seek the suppression of the evidence seized in the house. Surprisingly, this…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Alderman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Murray v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Miller v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Wilson v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Artis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- State v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
- In re A.S.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- United States v. OwensDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- Kellom v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.