Police-created emergencies
Kentucky v. Hollis Deshaun King
In brief
The Supreme Court overturned Kentucky's ruling and sent the case back, saying the emergency exception may apply when officers did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment to create the emergency.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 8-1 · May 16, 2011 · Opinion by Justice Alito
- What it’s about
- Kentucky's highest court excluded drugs after officers knocked at an apartment, finding that they created the emergency.
- Who it affects
- The ruling lets courts consider the emergency exception when officers did not create the emergency by violating or threatening to violate the Fourth Amendment.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court overturned that ruling and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded): the emergency exception can apply if police did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment; assuming an emergency existed, the Court found no evidence they did so before entering.
Officers knocked at an apartment before entering; drugs found inside became the evidence at issue.
The Fourth Amendment generally requires police to get a warrant before searching a home, though an emergency may be an exception.
Question presented
Does the exclusionary rule, which forbids the use of illegally seized evidence except in emergency situations, apply when the emergency is created by lawful police actions?
What the Court decided
Holding
1. The exigent circumstances rule applies when the police do not create the exigency by engaging or threatening to engage in conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment. 2. Assuming that an exigency existed here, there is no evidence that the officers either violated the Fourth Amendment or threatened to do so prior to the point when they entered the apartment. Pp. 16– 19. 302 S. W. 3d 649, reversed and remanded.
- Result
- Reversed
The Court's reasoning
The Court said the emergency exception may apply when police did not violate or threaten to violate the Fourth Amendment to create the emergency. Assuming an emergency existed, it found no evidence of such conduct before the officers entered.
The vote
From the opinions
“I dissent from the Court’s reduction of the Fourth Amendment’s force.”
What's next
The case returns to Kentucky's courts for further proceedings under the Supreme Court's rule. The Court assumed an emergency existed and did not decide that point.
Documents
Opinions
Audio
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 5 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Audio Recording added: Oral Arguments - King
Opinion added: King
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.