California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Brown v. Superior Court, 110 Cal.Rptr. 107, 34 Cal.App.3d 539 (Cal. App. 1973):
Also apposite is People v. Dumas, supra, 9 Cal.3d 871, 879, 109 Cal.Rptr. 304, 310, 512 P.2d 1208, 1214. There the court said: '(T)he police had reliable information that defendant not only possessed weapons but habitually answered the door armed with a firearm. They could reasonably infer from this activity that a substantial possibility existed he would employ deadly force in order to prevent his apprehension. As the officers approached the location to be searched, they became aware of no further circumstances that would defeat this inference. They could therefore reasonably conclude at the time of entry that they were faced with an emergency and that compliance with the announcement requirements would substantially increase their peril. On these facts we hold that the officers' failure to comply with section 1531 does not give rise to an application of the exclusionary rule.'
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.