Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued an opinion in the case of Kentucky v. King (previously discussed here).
The Court held (8-1, Justice Ginsberg dissenting) that police were permitted to conduct a warrantless search of an apartment when they smelled marijuana, knocked and announced their presence, then heard noises they thought were indicative of drugs being destroyed--that the exigent circumstances rule applied because the police did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment.
Opinion here.
Commentary:
NPR
The Wall Street Journal Law Blog
The Volokh Conspiracy
The Court held (8-1, Justice Ginsberg dissenting) that police were permitted to conduct a warrantless search of an apartment when they smelled marijuana, knocked and announced their presence, then heard noises they thought were indicative of drugs being destroyed--that the exigent circumstances rule applied because the police did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment.
Opinion here.
Commentary:
NPR
The Wall Street Journal Law Blog
The Volokh Conspiracy