Document: 547 U.S. 586 (2006) HUDSON v. MICHIGAN No. 04-1360. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 9, 2006. Reargued May 18, Decided June 15, *587 David A. Moran argued and reargued the cause for petitioner. With him on briefs were Timothy O'Toole, Steven R. Shapiro, Michael J. Steinberg, Kary L. Moss, Richard D. Korn. *588 Baughman filed a brief respondent. B. Salmons States as amicus curiae urging affirmance. Solicitor General Clement, Assistant Attorney Fisher, Deputy Dreeben, Deborah Watson.[*] JUSTICE SCALIA delivered opinion Court, except to Part IV. We decide whether violation "knock-and-announce" rule requires suppression all evidence found in search. I Police obtained warrant authorizing search drugs firearms at home petitioner Booker Hudson. They discovered both. Large quantities found, including cocaine rocks Hudson's pocket. A loaded gun was lodged between cushion armrest chair which he sitting. Hudson charged under Michigan law with unlawful drug firearm possession. This case is before us only because method entry into house. When police arrived execute warrant, they announced their presence, but waited short timeperhaps "three five seconds," App. 15before turning knob unlocked front door entering home. moved suppress inculpatory evidence, arguing that premature violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The trial court granted motion. On interlocutory review, Appeals reversed, relying *589 cases holding inappropriate when made pursuant without proper "`knock announce.'" Pet. Cert. 4 (citing People Vasquez, 461 Mich. 235, 602 N.W.2d 376 (1999) (per curiam); Stevens, 460 626, 597 53 (1999)). denied leave appeal. 465 932, 639 255 (2001). convicted He renewed claim appeal, rejected it affirmed conviction. 1-2. again declined review. 472 862, 692 385 (2005). certiorari. 545 1138 II common-law principle enforcement officers must announce presence provide residents an opportunity open ancient one. See Wilson Arkansas, 514 927, 931-932 (1995). Since 1917, Congress passed Espionage Act, this traditional protection has been part federal statutory law, see 40 Stat. 229, currently codified 18 C. § 3109. applied statute Miller States, 357 301 (1958), Sabbath 391 585 (1968). Finally, Wilson, we asked also command Amendment. Tracing its origins our English legal heritage, U.S., 931-936, concluded was. recognized new constitutional had not easily applied. following have noted many situations necessary knock announce. It "circumstances presen[t] threat physical violence," or if there "reason believe would likely be destroyed advance notice given," id., 936, knocking *590 announcing "futile," Richards Wisconsin, 520 385, 394 (1997). require "have reasonable suspicion . particular circumstances" one these grounds failing exists, acknowledged "[t]his showing high." Ibid. knock-and-announce does apply, easy determine precisely what do. How seconds' wait are too few? Our "reasonable time" standard, Banks, 540 31, 41 (2003), necessarily vague. Banks (a case, like one) held measure how long take resident reach door, dispose suspected drugsbut such time (15 20 seconds case) extended when, instance, contraband concealed. Id., 40-41. If ex post evaluation subject calculations, unsurprising that, ante, about encounter someone who may try harm them will uncertain wait. Happily, issues do confront here. From level onward, conceded violation. issue here remedy. specifically exclusionary appropriate requirement. 937, n. 4. That question squarely now. III In Weeks 232 383 (1914), adopted unlawfully seized from began applying same through Fourteenth Amendment, Mapp Ohio, 367 643 (1961). *591 Suppression however, always last resort, first impulse. generates "substantial social costs," Leon, 468 897, 907 (1984), sometimes include setting guilty free dangerous large. therefore "cautio[us] against expanding" it, Colorado Connelly, 479 157, 166 (1986), repeatedly emphasized rule's `costly toll' upon truth-seeking objectives presents high obstacle those [its] application," Pennsylvania Bd. Probation Parole Scott, 524 357, 364-365 (1998). "[i]ndiscriminate application" rule, supra, 908, applicable "where remedial thought most efficaciously served," Calandra, 414 338, 348 (1974)that is, deterrence benefits outweigh `substantial costs,'" 363 (quoting 907). did speak so guardedly. Expansive dicta Mapp, example, suggested wide scope rule. See, e. g., U. S., 655 ("[A]ll by searches seizures Constitution authority, inadmissible state court"). Whiteley Warden, Wyo. State Penitentiary, 401 560, 568-569 (1971), effect. But since approach. As explained Arizona Evans, 1, 13 (1995): "In Whiteley, treated identification synonymous application secured incident Subsequent reflexive rule." (Citation omitted.) said much decade earlier, "[w]hether sanction appropriately imposed `an separate rights party seeking *592 invoke conduct.'" 906 Illinois Gates, 462 213, 223 (1983)). other words, exclusion premised mere fact "but-for" obtaining evidence. show but-for causality necessary, sufficient, condition suppression. course, illegal manner Whether preliminary misstep occurred not, executed obtained, inside even could characterized discovering inside, "never `fruit poisonous tree' simply `it come light actions police.'" Segura 796, 815 (1984). 829 (Stevens, J., dissenting) ("We mechanically [exclusionary] every item causal connection misconduct"). Rather, cause, "causation logical sense alone," Ceccolini, 435 268, 274 (1978), can attenuated justify exclusion, 274-275. Even early days "hold police. more apt `whether, granting establishment primary illegality, instant objection exploitation illegality instead means sufficiently distinguishable purged taint.'" Wong Sun 371 471, 487-488 (1963) Maguire, Evidence Guilt 221 (1959); emphasis added). *593 Attenuation occur, remote. Nardone 308 341 (1939). occurs given direct connection, interest protected guarantee served obtained. "The penalties visited Government, turn public, bear some relation purposes serve." 279. Thus, New York Harris, 495 14 (1990), where warrantless arrest Harris's house, held: "[S]uppressing [Harris's] statement taken outside house serve purpose Harris' in-house illegal. requirement protect home, anything incriminating gathered arresting Harris rather than elsewhere, excluded, should been; thereby vindicated." 20. For reason, excluding fruits searches, see, Boyd 116 616 (1886); Weeks, 383; Silverthorne Lumber Co. 251 (1920); say nothing appropriateness vindicate interests Until valid issued, citizens entitled shield "their persons, houses, papers, effects," S. Const., Amdt. 4, government's scrutiny. Exclusion vindicates entitlement. quite differentand shielding potential eyes. *594 One human life limb, unannounced provoke violence supposed self-defense surprised resident. McDonald 335 451, 460-461 (1948) (Jackson, concurring). Sabbath, 589; Miller, 313, 12. Another property. Breaking (as old typically put it) absent announcement penalize "`did know process, which, notice, presumed obey .'" Semayne's Case, 5 Rep. 91a, 91b, 77 Eng. 194, 195-196 (K. 1603)). gives individuals "the comply avoid destruction property occasioned forcible entry." Richards, 393, 5. 41. And thirdly, protects elements privacy dignity sudden entrance. "opportunity prepare themselves for" interlude individual pull clothes get out bed." assures collect oneself answering door. What never protected, one's preventing government seeing taking described warrant. seizure inapplicable. B Quite apart unattenuated causation, *595 costs considerable. addition grave adverse consequence relevant entails (viz., risk releasing criminals society), imposing massive remedy generate constant flood alleged failures observe claims any asserted justification noknock entry, 394, inadequate support. Cf. Singleton, 441 F.3d 290, 293-294 (CA4 2006). cost lottery small, jackpot enormous: amounting get-out-of-jail-free card. Courts experience reality "[t]he frequently extensive litigation excluded." 366. Unlike Miranda requirements, compliance readily determined (either warrant; either warning given, not), constituted (or, matter, waited), suspicion" sort exceptions, difficult appellate incongruent proposes officers' refraining timely after announcing. observed, 590, amount uncertain. consequences running afoul massive, inclined longer requiresproducing preventable cases, others. 258 (White, concurring judgment). deemed severe enough produce unanimous agreement *596 "under circumstances, futile, inhibit effective investigation crime," yield. 394. Next costs" consider benefits, existence exclusion. (It sufficient condition: "[I]t follow adoption proposal might deter misconduct." 350; 910.) To begin with, value depends strength incentive commit forbidden act. Viewed perspective, violations worth lot. Violation produces otherwise ignoring realistically expected achieve absolutely prevention avoidance life-threatening resistance occupants premisesdangers existence, suspend anyway. Massive hardly required. seems true, contends, no all. Of course assertion accurate, Assuming must) civil suit deterrent, think forms misconduct similarly "undeterred." When, confessed suspect killing officer, arrested (along evidence) lawful warranted search, subjected abuse station seriously "effective deterrent"? *597 what, suit, deterrent" already-confessed suspect's Sixth denying prompt access counsel? Many regard significant right intruded nightclothesand yet "ineffective" available deterrent. arguably greater disregarding cannot assume context different contexts ago. forcing public today pay sins inadequacies regime existed almost half century Dollree Rev. 1979, 42 1983, meaningful relief; Monroe Pape, 365 167 (1961), slow steady expansion remedy, decided Term Mapp. another 17 years 1983 deep pocket municipalities, Monell City Dept. Social Servs., 436 658 (1978). Citizens whose bring until 10 Court's decision Bivens Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 388 (1971). complains "it very hard find lawyer this," Tr. Oral Arg. 7, 1988(b) answers objection. civil-rights yield damages small expense litigation, authorized attorney's fees plaintiffs. unavailable heydays exclusionary-rule jurisprudence, tied availability action. "very few lawyers representation persons police," now "much changed. *598 willing seek relief courts M. Avery, Rudovsky, & K. Blum, Misconduct: Law Litigation, p. v (3d ed. 2005); generally N. Aron, Liberty Justice All: Public Interest 1980s Beyond (1989) (describing growth public-interest law). number firms specialize grievances greatly expanded. points published decisions date huge awards violations. unhelpful statistic. large (and somehow deterred "damages" indifferent prospect 1988 fees), settled, indeed produced nominal injury. clear, least, lower allowing colorable suits go forward, unimpeded assertions qualified immunity. Green Butler, 420 689, 700-701 (CA7 2005) (denying immunity suit); Holland rel. Overdorff Harrington, 268 1179, 1193-1196 (CA10 2001) (same); Mena Simi Valley, 226 1031, 1041-1042 (CA9 2000) Gould Davis, 165 265, 270-271 1998) (same). far know, liability deterrent here, assumed contexts. Correctional Services Corp. Malesko, 534 61, 70 (2001) ("[T]he adequately matter enjoy immunity" violators not)); Nix Williams, 467 431, 446 development over past half-century deters increasing professionalism forces, internal discipline. ago 1980 felt *599 "assume" behavior "be dealt appropriately" authorities, Payner, 447 727, 733-734, (1980), forces across seriously. There "wide-ranging reforms education, training, supervision officers." Walker, Taming System: Control Discretion Criminal 1950-1990, 51 (1993). Numerous sources teach supervisors required respect guarantees various situations, craft Waksman Goodman, Search Seizure Handbook (2d 2006); Stone DeLuca, Administration: An Introduction 1994); E. Thibault, Lynch, McBride, Proactive Management (4th 1998). Failure enforce requirements exposes municipalities financial liability. Canton 489 378, (1989). Moreover, modern staffed professionals; credible assert discipline, limit successful careers, use citizen review enhance accountability. sum, considerable; minimal extant deterrences substantialincomparably factors deterring entries decided. Resort suppressing guilt unjustified. IV trio casesSegura 796 (1984); (1990); *600 Ramirez, 523 65 (1998)confirms conclusion unwarranted case. Like today's involved concededly entry. conducting crime apartment building; arrived, living there. brought activity. officer knocked. opened entered, them. neither nor consent enter, policean be. Officers then stayed 19 hours awaiting 800-801; 818-819 dissenting). Once alerted policestill having premises removed conducted 801. refused exclude resulting gained 799, 804-805, distinguished effects search: "None information derived related way initial petitioners' .," 814. "beyond dispute possessed agents entered independent source discovery challenged." "wholly unrelated prior entry," ibid., warrantless, bizarre treat harshly probable backing issued later "independent source" proceeded illegally waited, *601 going least effect.[1] second defendant's contrary Payton York, 445 573 (1980). gave statement. 15-16. it. led process culminated acquisition sought excluded. While product being custody," "was fruit someplace else." Likewise here: preceded knock-and-announce.[2] *602 effected breaking window. ultimately was, reasonable, discussion unanimously following: "[D]estruction violate though itself suppression." 71. Had window unreasonable, said, "sufficient relationship guns evidence." 72, 3. clearer expression proposition impermissible trigger rule? * foregoing reasons affirm judgment Appeals. ordered. KENNEDY, judgment. Two underscored decision. First, expectations linked principles order. 934 interpreted suggesting *603 trivial beyond law's concern. Second, continued operation settled defined precedents, doubt. Today's determines specific requirement, basic question, security central Amendment's understood beginnings Republic. common understanding ensures allegiance institutions, instrument transmitting generations undiminished meaning force. bears repeating serious sanctity requisites Security erosion indifference contempt. system, explains, developed procedures training discipline act competently lawfully. measures prove ineffective, fortified detailed regulations legislation. Supplementing safeguards remedies, restitution discrete harms. These remedies apply violations, including, exceptional fright humiliation. matter. Under precedents link allow 65, 3 (1998) (application relationship" conduct evidence). results want 20-second pause ensuing, lasting discloses *604 criminality, failure properly caused address demonstrated pattern widespread shown, particularly committed lacked voice mount protest, reason then, acknowledge extending mean revising causation limits discretion type extension practical implications, adding list requiring resolution criminal questions waiting announce, subsequent my view correct hold am convinced relevance Scalia appears conclude, fully supported Parts opinion. accordingly join concur BREYER, whom STEVENS, SOUTER, GINSBURG join, dissenting. 927 (1995), normally dwelling. holds need suppressed. *605 result, destroys strongest Constitution's support precedent. At near set forth (1914). Appendix, infra. thus doubly troubling. represents departure precedents. weakens, perhaps destroys, protection. ought outcome two sets cases. shall describing underlying law. describes knockand-announce initially 11 supra. (1968) (suppressing requirement); (1958) tracing lineage back 13th century, 2, wrote "[a]n examination leaves doubt reasonableness dwelling depend authority entering." 931. "basic principle" agreed "[s]everal prominent founding-era commentators," *606 woven quickly fabric American law" via constitutions statutes, 933. further "little Framers officer's among considered assessing seizure." 934. "common-law `knock announce' inquiry Amendment." 929. "a constitutionally defective enter announcement." 936; 36 (2003); (1998); 387 certain well-established include: (1886). seminal 120 ago, wrote, quoted language, prohibitions "to invasions employés man's privacies life. doors, rummaging drawers, constitutes essence offence; invasion indefeasible personal security, liberty private property." 630. 28 Boyd, originated Federal Government retain unconstitutionally *607 trial. pointed "[i]f letters documents" "and used accused offense, declaring secure value, well stricken Constitution." 393. (1920). created exception (or qualification of) Weeks' during subpoena documents viewed Writing Holmes "does facts [unlawfully] become sacred inaccessible. knowledge proved others ." 392. stands "fruits" unconnected untainted by, 444 (1984) "inevitable discovery" exception). Wolf Colorado, 338 25 (1949), Both applies Wolf, not. arbitrary intrusion implicit `the concept ordered liberty' enforceable Due Process Clause." 27-28. "an essential ingredient right." 29. overruled Wolf. Experience, showed alternative methods enforcing *608 failed. 651-653; Cahan, 44 Cal. 2d 434, 447, 282 P.2d 905, 913 (1955) (majority Traynor, J.) ("Experience [in California] demonstrated, administrative, lawless seizures"). consequently "all court." 655. "To otherwise," added, grant withhold privilege enjoyment." 656. Reading IA, foundational IB, clear apply. thing, elementary logic leads conclusion. "conside[r]" complied "in 934; 36. insists unreasonable speaking, seizure. ever (in prosecutions) prosecutions), seizure" "barred" trials. 383); driving namely, behavior, argues strongly Elkins 364 206, 217 (1960) (purpose deterto compel guaranty removing disregard it"). Silverthorne, based holdings *609 recognition admission undermine promise. All three make promise hollow one, 657, reducing form words," 392, "of value" seeks protect, Indeed, due belief mechanisms "worthless futile." 652. Why less here? Without ignore risking easier, risky, proceed immediately requisite (say, knock-andannounce) compliance. Mericli, Apprehension Peril Exception Knock Announce RulePart I, 16 129, 130 (hereinafter Mericli) (noting "[d]rug authorities safety lies swift, surprising overwhelming forcenot official authority"). circumstance true well. (such 1983), unconstitutional Kamisar, Defense Exclusionary Rule, 26 Harv. Pub. Pol'y 119, 126-129 (2003) (arguing "five decades post-Weeks `freedom' inhibiting effect *610 failed jurisdiction" "times changed" post-Mapp). reporting legion. 34 Geo. Ann. Crim. Proc. 31-35 (2005) (collecting cases); Bremer, 85 5th 1 state-court Brief Petitioner 16-17 cases). reported seem frequent indicate pattern." Ante, 604 (Kennedy, Yet majority, cite single plaintiff collected solely result concedes present ., virtually nonexistent." Respondent 35, 66. Michigan's amici concede immunities prevent tort substitute time. Legal Foundation 10; Hope Pelzer, 536 730, 739 (2002) (difficulties overcoming defenses). Stewart, author opinions, explained, "can great," "expensive, time-consuming, available, rarely successful." Road Ohio Beyond: Origins, Development Future Rule Search-and-Seizure Cases, 83 Colum. 1365, 1388 (1983). upshot deterrencethe critical factor close centuryargues comparable evidentiary *611 argue, majority does, better trained police, unnecessary argue (The recently similar argument Dickerson 530 428, 441-442 (2000).) "more injury" confirm, deny, inability 598. despite myriad damages, concession nonexistence) settled" perhaps, desperation argument. ibid. candidly admits, "assumed" "[a]s [it] know[s], deterrent," support-free assumption embody normal approach surprising, looking pertinent precedent offer has, triggers 590-592; cf. (1983) violated). class seized, limited. only: (1) "not appreciable deterrence," Janis, 428 433, 454 (1976); 919-920 *612 (exception searching executes "good faith"); (1995) clerical errors employees); Walder 347 62 (1954) impeachment purposes), (2) admissibility proceedings trials issue, parole revocation proceedings); INS Lopez-Mendoza, 1032, 1050 (plurality opinion) deportation 458 tax 348-350 (1974) grand jury Powell, 465, 493-494 (1976) habeas proceedings). Neither exceptions ordinary acting "as circumstances," 920, involve employees (3), importantly, key rationale exception, "lack missing, Probation, noncriminal achieved "minimal" "application already provides searches"); Tucker, 417 good faith, "deterrent assumes engaged willful, negligent, conduct"). latter rationale, underlies *613 future errors," 14, "`further ends way,'" 919-920. aware basis exception. 300 Weeks. nearly third W. Greenhalgh, Handbook: Chronological Survey Decisions 27-130 2003) summarizing 332 1914 2002). nature varies. instances others, false affidavits; still manner. involving (federally nationally Mapp), mentioned, explicitly implicitly upheld required) "questio[n], absence efficacious sanction, State's case" Franks Delaware, 438 154, 171 persuasive majority's refusal certainly finds) odd areas automatically demand 596-597 (suspect confesses, beat up afterwards; apparently him, station, refuse tell counsel). Nor *614 anyway (to mistaken burglar), (believing quick secure, entry) voluntarily so. Mericli Special Weapons Tactics (SWAT) team practices); Balko, No SWAT (Apr. 6, 2006), http://www. cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6344 (all Internet materials 2006, Clerk file). deterrence, consistently "`substantial costs'"at "`social costs'" special 596. mentions accompany principle: constable blunders, defendant (consider itself); defendants jurisprudence), (3) merits claims. 595-596. fact, "no-knock" warrants provided diminishing uncertainty, "`cost[ly]'" whole principles, determining justified exigency. itself. now, rejected. Michigan, several additional arguments. view, arguments rest misunderstandings *615 592. commonly Keeton, Dobbs, Owen, Prosser Keeton Torts 266 (5th 1984). Although lawfully, Their inseparably characterizes actual entry; home; finding seizing time, foreseeable within 2 Restatement (Second) (1963-1964). separating "manner entry" slices finely. noted, independently event, renders "constitutionally defective." (compliance "factors (emphasis added)); Ker California, 374 23, (opinion Brennan, ("[A] indispensable predicate search"). nonetheless accepts satisfied because, (what refers "preliminary misstep"), *616 house." proposition, rests inevitable claim, misunderstands doctrine. discussing 607. refer place (contrary fact) lawful. doctrine hypothetically happened acted lawfully place. "independent" "inevitable" occur (not behavior. cannot, warrant) Coolidge Hampshire, 443, 450-451 Instead, "inevitably means." "What man do." Austin, Ifs Cans, Proceedings British Academy 109, 111-112 (1956). "later, "genuinely tainted one." Murray 487 533, 542 (1988) added); (Marshall, joined Stevens O'Connor, JJ., ("When `wholly of' violation, *617 Case illustrates principle. Nix, eliciting statements invoked counsel. Those victim's body. body admissible inevitably volunteer effort ongoingwhether 449. despite, of, "trio cases" says "confirms [the Court's] conclusion," 599-600 opinion), earlier executing reasoned "evidence day warrant"i. e., entryand wholly [unlawful] Segura, 814 Murray, warehouse returned observed (illegal) while agents' "[k]nowledge marijuana assuredly acquired why *618 apply." 541 reflects misunderstanding says, "[i]n next statement: "Whether Despite phrase course," correct. occurred, "police. house; discovery. 615. drugs. beside point. done behaved unlawfully. Was motion chain events behavior? answer "no." point diminishes (but Michigan) assure necessary. 396, 7 statutes). authorize fails *619 requirements. disregarded, knock-andannounce Would authorizes Tuesday permit Monday? middle night? me C policyrelated variant theme: insofar causes kind against. adds needless down door) unpleasant surprise. concludes say, damage property, "intimate compromising moment," excited utterance occupant caught surprise, more. Amicus Curiae 12, 28. makes suppressed once becomes "attenuated." using word "attenuated" mean, took *620 way, i. "`means (1963); Brown Illinois, 422 603-604 (1975). "attenuation" (thereby, effect, making States). "Attenuation," "also obtained." 593. adds, "human life" (at stake householder "surprised"), "property" door), "those entrance," door." 594. none problems describe values, purposes, help homeowners damaged doors; that. occupants' assuring complying (among others) diminish offensive intrusion. Frankfurter "knock prelude [is] inconsistent conception enshrined [our] history" Constitution. takes 931 (knock-and-announce recognizes *621 `his castle defence asylum'" Blackstone, Commentaries *288)); 313 (federal "codif[ied] tradition embedded Anglo-American reflected reverence individual's house"). Over "[i]t doors" "essence offence," "invasions life." just reiterated "`it center lives people.'" Georgia Randolph, 115 Minnesota Carter, 525 83, 99 concurring)). "centuries-old 307). wrong reduce nightclothes." 597; ("[I]ndividual interest[s]" inconsequential" "should unduly minimized"). implicated sense, unlawful. 936. unlawful, discovered, possession little unconstitutionality contraband, Kyllo 533 27, (2001); Coolidge, *622 473. general "privacy values James 493 307, 319 (1990). Third, interest-based departs Ordinarily look turned between, materially magistrate (consequently) invalid 601-602, section Kennedy join). surprise me, efforts trace connections retail complicate threatening workability. D oral argument, especially harsh case." 28; 24. focuses can, officer. Perhaps gun, "uncertain" 595. afoul" "rule massive," lead "officers cases." dangerous, *623 validity Similarly, longer-than-necessary delay, (if true) doing "would futile" 394; 36-37; 935-936. do, uncertainty neutral concerns risks permitting obtain judge, procedure remove maintain backup "authority exercise concerning wisdom no-knock executed." "[I]f circumstances exigency arrive straight in." 37. "[r]easonable demanding standard Alabama White, 496 325, 330 Terry 392 21-22 (no moment `warrant caution belief' action appropriate"). Consider drugs, *624 guns. guns, danger officers? lacks warrants) prosecutor likelihood lawful? seen record, won. won, win. clarify contours believes fuzzy. procedural along warrants, regardless, resolve "uncertain[ty]" discusses levels beneath elsewhere (e. exigent circumstances). Regardless, fears harmful consequences, face directly addressing fine, indeed, don't it." E apparent reliesSegura 796; 14; 65do 599-602. declines rely Ramirez. *625 "search entry,' warrant." 600. Then `independent source' effect." 600-601. understand IIIB, timing difference off seize 814; ("The `means distinguishable' purge `taint' arising entry"). intervening taint 618. rendered source." suggest intended create major notwithstanding impact deterrence. rules, clearly inadmissibility behavior; route undercut *626 exceptionat often change calculus. incentives differently. foolish By so, ."); ("A faced rarely, ever, position calculate discovered"); ("If prosecution establish preponderance meanshere volunteers' searchthen received"). Segura's ante hope render found. contrast, obvious, todaynot post-Mapp) caserefused significantly impair officials' result. 593, 601; (declining Harris). *627 statements: confession written videotaped interview district attorney 16. videotape, challenge rulings. sole later, outside-the-home custody. statement, custody, Immediately stated holding, explained: herea homeis "`not fruit'" entry? 601. entire petitioner's compels opposite reached today. "reverence 313; ("Payton *628 stemmed `overriding traditions Republic'"). "excluded, been," 20, remaining searching. ("Even decline principal obtains: taken, home"). offers plurality best hope. 602. isolated "destruction 71 accept dictum, 931, thing suppress. improper analysis (where, definition, quantifiable damages) differ. *629 "cost" "entering lottery," claiming enormous"namely, "get-out-ofjail-free card." "social benefits. 599. Leaving aside own estimate left simple unvarnished conclusion, "[r]esort unjustified." judicial judgment, own, inappropriate? Could subsidiary important remedy? game candle? answer, believe, "no" history, history shows important. 931-936. precedent, pre-existing category fit. 612-613. empirical confirmation suggests: 608-610. text room instinct. protecting *630 emphasize protections effective, lest "sound ear break hope." principle, formed centerpiece ensure promises. firmly grounded logic, fact. why, respect, dissent. APPENDIX TO OPINION OF remanding determination) 1. (1914) (warrantless search) 2. Amos (1921) Agnello 269 (1925) Byars 273 (1927) (invalid Berkeness, 275 149 insufficient affidavit) 6. Taylor 286 (1932) 7. Grau 287 124 8. Nathanson 290 (1933) 9. 451 10. Kremen 353 346 (1957) curiam) *631 11. 206 (search Silverman 505 (1961) electronic device) 13. Chapman 610 14. 15. 471 arrest) Fahy Connecticut, 375 17. Aguilar Texas, 378 108 (1964) 18. Stanford 379 476 (1965) particularity defect) 19. Louisiana, 382 Riggan Virginia, 384 152 (1966) 21. Bumper North Carolina, 543 (lack 22. Recznik Lorain, 393 23. Chimel 395 752 (1969) Von Cleef Jersey, 25. Shipley 818 26. Vale 399 30 (1970) 27. Connally Georgia, 429 245 (1977) judge neutral) *632 Tyler, 499 (1978) Mincey Arizona, 437 30. 154 perjury) 31. (1980) 32. Steagald 204 (1981) 33. Clifford, 464 34. Welsh 466 740 circumstances) 35. Thompson 469 Hicks, 480 321 (1987) (unreasonable Olson, 91 (1990) home) 38. Flippo West 528 39. 27 heat-imaging technology) 40. Kirk 635 Kaupp 538 626 NOTES [*] Tracey Maclin, Joshua Dratel Cato Institute et al. reversal. Kent Scheidegger Charles Hobson [1] BREYER'S insistence "obtained post, 617 (dissenting entirely distinguish Similarly inapposite appeal Frankfurter's 25, history,'" 620. "How offensive," Breyer asserts, "when all," "without (i. Segurawhere admitted unlike 625-626, comport views 817 disposition, fear, affirmative engage [2] undermines "whether point," 621. flatly refuted plain govern sanctions 17, 20; dissent's attempt vindication 626-628. him.

Category: 0