WASHINGTON (Reuter) A unanimous Supreme Court Monday
refused to exempt the police in all drug cases from the general
requirement that they knock and announce their identity before
searching for evidence.

The justices disagreed with a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling
that allowed a blanket exception to the requirement when drugs
are the object of the search warrant being executed by the
police.

The nation's high court said the Constitution's Fourth
Amendment, which bars unreasonable searches and seizures of
evidence, does not permit an acrosstheboard exception for drug
investigations from the knockandannounce rule.

Wisconsin had argued that drugs can be easily destroyed and
that drug dealers often are armed and dangerous, two factors it
said justified giving the police a blanket exemption.

But Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the high court that
creating exceptions to the requirement presented serious
concerns.

He said the exception would impermissibly insulate from
judicial review drug cases which do not pose special risks to
officers and he warned that creating exceptions for categories
of crimes would make the knockandannounce rule meaningless.

The Supreme Court in 1995 ruled that the knockandannounce
requirement governing police conduct must be scrutinized under
constitutional standards. The court did not state that all
police searches must be preceded by an announcement, but said it
depends on the circumstances of each case.

Most states generally allow the police to use force to enter
a residence only after they announce their presence to carry out
a search or to conduct an arrest.

Stevens said a noknock entry would be justified when the
police had a reasonable suspicion that announcing their presence
would be dangerous or would inhibit the investigation of the
crime.

The case involved Steiney Richards, whose hotel room in
Madison, Wisconsin, police entered at 3:40 a.m. on Dec. 31,
1991. They did not knock or announce their entry.

Drugs were seized from the room. Richards, who was convicted
and sentenced to 13 years in prison, sought to suppress the
drugs as an unconstitutional search.

The Supreme Court said the evidence in the case established
that the decision by the police to enter the hotel room was
reasonable under the circumstances.