The recent State v. Caronna decision from the Appellate Division demonstrates why it is important to pay close attention to United States Supreme Court dissents in cases ruling against asserted federal constitutional rights. In this case, police officers executed a knock-and-announce search warrant at a residence without knocking or announcing but, rather, simply coming in through an unlocked door, saying hello, and walking into an upstairs bedroom.

When the defendant moved to suppress the resulting drug evidence the state responded, predictably, that the United States Supreme Court had already ruled, 5-4, that the Fourth Amendment did not require evidence that was seized in violation of a knock-and-announce warrant to be suppressed (Hudson v. Michigan (2006)). Didn't that end the matter?