Page 106 - Legal Guide DEMO

LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO

Task: Exigent Home Entry-Destruction of Evidence
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO

Kentucky v. King, 131 S. Ct. 1849 (2011).
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
When does law enforcement created exigency violate the 4
th
Amendment:

Where law enforcement does not create the exigency by engaging or

threatening to engage in conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment,
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
warrantless entry to prevent the destruction of evidence is reasonable

and thus allowed. For these reasons, we conclude that the exigent

circumstances rule applies when the police do not gain entry to
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
premises by means of an actual or threatened violation of the Fourth

Amendment. This holding provides ample protection for the privacy

rights that the Amendment protects.

LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO

105
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
©2020 Jack Ryan Legal & Liability Risk Management Institute