United States v. Diaz-Ortiz, No. 18-2948 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseApplying plain error review, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence, holding that the officers' alleged violation of the knock-and-announce rule had nothing to do with their seizure of the gun, drugs, and cash in defendant's hotel room pursuant to their search warrant. In this case, the warrant was based solely on evidence obtained prior to the officers' entry. Therefore, the court explained that regardless of whether the officers violated the knock-and-announce rule, they still would have obtained and executed the warrant and discovered the aforementioned evidence.
Court Description: Melloy, Author, with Shepherd and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. The police officers' alleged violation of the knock-and-announce rule had nothing to do with their seizure of the guns, drugs and cash in defendant's hotel room pursuant to a search warrant as that warrant was obtained solely based on evidence obtained before the alleged violation of the knock-and-announce rule. See Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.