gno.law

People v. RABADUEX

California Supreme Court · S121159 · 2007-03-28 · Published · 154 P.3d 1003 · 56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 477

Area
criminal
Panel
George (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

56 Cal.Rptr.3d 477 (2007) 154 P.3d 1003 PEOPLE v. RABADUEX (Jean Michael).

No. S121159. Supreme Court of California.

March 28, 2007. Dismissed and remanded to Court of Appeal, Third District.

In this matter review was granted to decide whether a defendant who is not present when law enforcement officers allegedly violate the "knock-and-announce" rule in executing a valid warrant to search the defendant's residence, has a legitimate expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment of the federal Constitution, prerequisite to seeking suppression of the evidence obtained on that basis. Subsequently, in Hudson v. Michigan (2006) 547 U.S. ___, ___, 126 S.Ct. 2159, 2166-2168, 165 L.Ed.2d 56, the United States Supreme Court concluded that a violation of the knock-and-announce rule by law enforcement officers having a valid warrant to search the residence does not under the exclusionary rule require suppression of the evidence obtained pursuant to the warrant. In light of that ruling, it is unnecessary to resolve the threshold issue upon which we granted review. Accordingly, review is dismissed. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.528(b).)

GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, MORENO, and CORRIGAN, JJ., concur.

Cites, in this corpus