Experts divided on ‘no-knock’ warrant in Ky. woman’s death
A national authority on search and seizure law said the no-knock warrant that Louisville, Kentucky, police obtained for Breonna Taylor’s apartment should not have been issued because there was no evidence justifying it in that particular case.
Taylor was shot and killed by police after her boyfriend, Kenneth Taylor, thinking they were being robbed, fired one shot inside the apartment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has said judges can allow police to search without knocking when they have a reasonable suspicion that under the “particular circumstances” of the case, the targets could destroy evidence.
The detective who obtained the warrant for Taylor’s home March 13 said that “these drug traffickers have a history of attempting to destroy evidence, have cameras on the location that compromise detectives once an approach to the dwelling is made, and have a history of fleeing from law enforcement.”
But Professor Christopher Slobogin, director of Vanderbilt University’s Criminal Justice Program, said “unless the police had reason to believe this particular house had cameras, and explained that reason to the judge, a no-knock warrant would be improper.”
“Otherwise,” he said, “police would never need to knock and announce for any search related to drug dealing, with consequences like the one we have in this case.”
Added Brian Gallini, a law professor at University of Arkansas who has written about the Fourth Amendment: “If it was appropriate here, then every routine drug transaction would justify grounds for no-knock.”
Taylor’s apartment did not have cameras, nor were drugs found during the search.
The Louisville Metro Police Department said they knocked first and introduced themselves – despite having a no-knock warrant – but witnesses have disputed that.
Jefferson Circuit Judge Mary Shaw signed the warrant but has declined to comment.
Lexington, Kentucky, attorney Mark Wohlander, a former FBI agent, federal prosecutor and director of a narcotics task force, said the “boilerplate” language cited by Louisville Metro Police Detective Joshua Jaynes did not justify a no-knock search.
“I don’t know how this ever cleared a supervisor’s desk,” Wohlander said in an interview.
But two Louisville defense attorneys – both former prosecutors – said they think Shaw’s issuance of the no-knock warrant was permissible.
Brian Butler said that no-knock warrants are given based on “probable cause,” which he described as a very low standard
Kent Wicker said courts have generally upheld issuing such warrants based on allegations of what “drug dealers do in general.”