POLICE CAN BREAK INTO HOME SOON AFTER KNOCKING, COURT SAYS

WASHINGTON -- After knocking, police don't have to wait longer than 20
seconds before breaking into the home of a drug suspect, a unanimous
Supreme Court ruled yesterday in a case involving a man who said he needed
more time to get from the shower to the door.

LaShawn Banks emerged soapy and naked to find masked, heavily armed
officers searching for drugs in his Las Vegas apartment in 1998. His case
gave the court its first opportunity to say how long police must wait
before breaking into a home to serve a warrant.

The court didn't set a specific standard but said the brief delay in the
Banks case was long enough. More time would give drug suspects an
opportunity to flush evidence down the toilet.

Justice David Souter, writing for the nine justices, said that although
"this call is a close one, we think that after 15 or 20 seconds without a
response, police could fairly suspect that cocaine would be gone if they
were reticent any longer."

He noted the unfortunate timing of the afternoon raid, which brought Banks
"out dripping to confront the police." But police didn't know Banks was in
the shower, Souter said.

Banks' lawyer, Randall Roske, criticized the ruling, saying it will lead to
aggressive searches.

"Police are going to read this as, 'Knock and announce and kick the door
in,' " he said.

The Supreme Court has said that in most cases, police armed with court
warrants to search for drugs must knock and announce themselves; otherwise,
they run afoul of the Constitution's Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable
searches. There are exceptions, such as when police have reason to believe
a suspect would be dangerous.

Although yesterday's ruling did not spell out exactly how long is a
reasonable time to wait before executing warrants for drugs or other
contraband, it's likely many officers in drug cases will follow Souter's
reasoning and think waiting 15 to 20 seconds is appropriate.

"This gives officers the leeway they were taking throughout the country,"
said Stephen Saltzburg, a law professor at George Washington University.
"This is a case that suggests great deference to the police."

Officers knocked and announced themselves at Banks' apartment, then waited
15 to 20 seconds before using a battering ram to break down the door.

They forced Banks to the floor and handcuffed him, then allowed him to put
on underwear, court records show.

The North Las Vegas police and federal officers found crack cocaine and
three guns during the raid. Banks served four years of an 11-year prison
sentence before his conviction was overturned.

Banks, 26, was at work yesterday and not available for comment. His
attorney said Banks would be returning to prison.

Souter said that because police believed there were drugs inside Banks'
home, officers had more reason to rush in.

"Police seeking a stolen piano may be able to spend more time to make sure
they really need the battering ram," Souter wrote.

Generally, courts have considered whether police moved too hastily "case by
case, largely avoiding categories and protocols for searches," Souter said.
He noted that some courts have found delays shorter than 15 seconds to be
reasonable.

Justices reversed the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in Banks'
favor. Souter said the appeals court was wrong to set up a multipart method
for reviewing knock-and-announce cases.

The Supreme Court ruled in 1995 that no-knock entries usually are unlawful.

Two years later, justices gave an exception to officers executing drug
warrants who can show they had reason to believe a suspect would be
dangerous or destroy evidence.

"I think this is going to be their last word for a while," said Mark
Dobson, a professor at the Nova Southeastern University Law Center in Fort
Lauderdale, Fla.