we read your briefs and we look forward to your arguments the first one is united states versus nixon and when you're ready you you know the government takes the position that in this situation such as banks where you have a search warrant are drugs which are easily disposable part of that in connection with the search warrant the officers had supporting affidavit yes they did so they're aware i do believe in fact i'm certain that the officers knew what they were searching for they were searching for hot it's narcotics paraphernalia and so actually the government's position to to answer judge fisher question that when you have a search warrant for drugs or anything that's easily disposable and you have a situation where you don't know whether anybody is hall factored in circumstances exist per se and  when the supreme court held that they didn't banks when you have officers who are at the front door and just don't know one way or the other whether or not anyone's fault if you allow more than that period of time the fifteen to twenty seconds at that time of day which admittedly was two in the afternoon on different circumstances  involve disposing of drugs we're supposed to make it up no i think you're out of supreme court kerman and i'm paraphrasing also not using their exact language but they said the observations that a reasonable officer would dictate in disappoint drugs the supreme court and banks doesn't say that you have to have the subjective belief it costs about a reasonable officer and that reason the law office or any reasonable officers at the front door has waited a period of time you're going to realize that he doesn't know who's inside existed as they did in banks that the officer still waited a fairly reasonable time a minimum of twenty seconds up to thirty seconds that the testimony is clear that the agent testified that at a minimum he waited that long search warrant so i would indicate even without if you can circumstances the weight of authority even animists weight of authority is that twenty to thirty seconds is really a fairly long period of time to wait i just record specifically state on the record for the state of mind make a finding or statement indicate the state of mind  where there was a knock and announce absolutely no sounds in sight no one coming to the door silence and no idea whether or not anybody was home inside the residence i can't extrapolate beyond that unfortunately i think we've got your argument well in hand let's hear from the other side and we'll give you some time for obama thank you very much thank not be exits of circumstances but there is the right to enter based on the probable cause and then the question is whether those are constructive refusal to respond to  there to respond and he gives the example of five seconds in a motel room maybe a couple minutes in a town home and that's what nobody talks about fifteen seconds and it's you know a small apartment well you're in the shower or just getting out of bed and you hear this kind of thinking this is not somebody this is not the normal conduct you would expect of a of a police officer wanting to gain a lawful entry for your house to execute a search warrant it's something that's go them forcibly out or if there are constructively refused entry they can shorten the time down you know their exit in circumstances but there has to be a reasonable amount of time your scenario if you just discussed seems independent magistrate has taken a look at it to say there is at least efficient evidence to execute the warrant and to make the search so we're not starting a ground zero this is not just ringing the doorbell and breaking in somebody's house because in a neighborhood where they puzzler partly because of the way the supreme court ruled as to painting and banks the statute says that they can enter without someone allowing the man when they think that they have been refused entry there's been a gloss put on the statue entry waiting between twenty seconds and a half an hour downtown anything more what worries me about this case is number one maybe the supreme court is telling us without quite saying so overtly that drug cases are different and that there are per se asian circumstances and drug cases maybe another thing that worries me is if we seize upon a specific facts of this case and we see an officer bottomley ga think that that exists in every one of these search and seizure cases i think that basically officers are taught by various law enforcement agencies what the latest pronouncements are from the ninth circuit the u s supreme court the california supreme court and there are also quite frankly how do i guess lawfully to get around the rulings of each court and i guess the chips will fall you know where they will they have to deal prefer to knock the door down and have it open i thought well and he's probably knocked down five hundred of them and the most you can say is well sometimes they didn't answer they were just sitting there he never says in my experience even one time they were right or they were flushing them down the toilet