The Supreme Court has held that violation of the "knock-and-announce rule"
does not require suppression of evidence found in a search if the interests violated had nothing to do with the seizure of evidence.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court has ruled that even if law enforcement officers violate the "knock-and-announce" rule, evidence obtained during the search does not necessarily have to be suppressed. This is because the exclusionary rule, which might suppress evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, does not apply if the violation is unrelated to the evidence's discovery. This was established in the case Hudson v. Michigan (2006), where the Court held that violations of the knock-and-announce rule do not require the suppression of evidence found in a search.

The Supreme Court Has Held That Violation of the "Knock-And-Announce