skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 136269 Find in a Library
Title: Knock, Knock: Who's There? Does Police Entry of Premises by Ruse Violate the Individual's Fourth Amendment Rights in Light of Katz v. United States?
Journal: Criminal Justice Journal  Volume:12  Issue:2  Dated:(Spring 1990)  Pages:167-184
Author(s): W Edwards
Date Published: 1990
Page Count: 18
Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: In Katz v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court reached a landmark decision based on the fourth amendment when it determined that an individual has a right to privacy and hence a right to be left alone from governmental intrusion.
Abstract: In Katz, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents suspected a public telephone was being used to transmit illegal gambling information. Without a search warrant, FBI agents placed an electronic listening device on the outside of the phone booth. Katz was convicted after the trial court determined the taped conversations were admissible. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the conviction, ruling that the right to privacy had been violated because Katz had not knowingly exposed his telephone conversations to the public. In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court developed a two-part test: (1) that an individual must exhibit an actual, subjective expectation of privacy; and (2) that the expectation must be one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable. The Supreme Court thus shifted the fourth amendment focus from the search of a constitutionally protected area to whether police intrusion violates an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy. When an individual closes the door of his or her home, the interior of the home becomes constitutionally protected and subject to the two-part test outlined in Katz. To safeguard this protection, a police officer is required to knock and announce prior to entry. Further, the fourth amendment requires a police officer to secure a valid search or arrest warrant before employing ruse. Ruse entries substantially decrease the threat of violent confrontation and reduce the risk of injury to police, home occupants, and innocent bystanders. Ruse entries also benefit society by allowing police to secure evidence before an occupant has a chance to destroy it. If ruse entries are employed correctly, fourth amendment protections which the knock and announce rule is designed to provide are still extended to the home occupant. Ruse does not require occupants to give up their reasonable expectation of privacy; only the issuance of a warrant by the court determines when an individual's privacy is surrendered. 122 footnotes
Main Term(s): Right of privacy
Index Term(s): Covert entry; Search warrants; US Supreme Court decisions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.