美国诉Ankeny案:修正第四修正案的合理行为要求

IF 5.2 1区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Yale Law Journal Pub Date : 2008-01-01 DOI:10.2307/20455807
Richard M. Re
{"title":"美国诉Ankeny案:修正第四修正案的合理行为要求","authors":"Richard M. Re","doi":"10.2307/20455807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At 5:30 a.m., just before dawn, forty-four police officers converged on Kelly David Ankeny’s two-story Portland residence to execute a warrant for his arrest. The officers in charge had spent weeks crafting a plan to arrest Ankeny, a convicted and wanted felon, for assaulting his estranged wife with a firearm. In a matter of seconds, heavily armed police broke down the building’s firstfloor doors, while others outside fired rubber bullets through the building’s second-floor windows, spewing glass into the house and leaving holes in the ceiling and furniture. The first officer who encountered Ankeny pointed a riflemounted flashlight in his eyes and ordered him to the ground, just as a second officer blindly tossed a “flash-bang” grenade into the room. The grenade exploded near Ankeny’s face, causing firstand second-degree burns. Meanwhile, police entering the second floor threw a flash-bang into an occupied bedroom, setting fire to a mattress and box spring that the police then threw out of a window. After securing the occupants, including a pregnant woman and one-year-old infant, one of the officers sent the following text message: “BIG TIME FUN!! LOTS OF BROKEN GLASS, BAD GUY JUMPED ON THE FLASHBANG, GOOD TIME HAD BY ALL.” In United States v. Ankeny, a divided Ninth Circuit panel declined to suppress the weapons that were discovered in Ankeny’s residence and used to charge him with, inter alia, being a felon in possession of firearms. Over Judge Reinhardt’s dissent, the majority held that suppression was an inappropriate remedy regardless of whether the search at issue was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Drawing on the Supreme Court’s recent knock-and-","PeriodicalId":48293,"journal":{"name":"Yale Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"United States V. Ankeny: Remedying the Fourth Amendment's Reasonable Manner Requirement\",\"authors\":\"Richard M. Re\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/20455807\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"At 5:30 a.m., just before dawn, forty-four police officers converged on Kelly David Ankeny’s two-story Portland residence to execute a warrant for his arrest. The officers in charge had spent weeks crafting a plan to arrest Ankeny, a convicted and wanted felon, for assaulting his estranged wife with a firearm. In a matter of seconds, heavily armed police broke down the building’s firstfloor doors, while others outside fired rubber bullets through the building’s second-floor windows, spewing glass into the house and leaving holes in the ceiling and furniture. The first officer who encountered Ankeny pointed a riflemounted flashlight in his eyes and ordered him to the ground, just as a second officer blindly tossed a “flash-bang” grenade into the room. The grenade exploded near Ankeny’s face, causing firstand second-degree burns. Meanwhile, police entering the second floor threw a flash-bang into an occupied bedroom, setting fire to a mattress and box spring that the police then threw out of a window. After securing the occupants, including a pregnant woman and one-year-old infant, one of the officers sent the following text message: “BIG TIME FUN!! LOTS OF BROKEN GLASS, BAD GUY JUMPED ON THE FLASHBANG, GOOD TIME HAD BY ALL.” In United States v. Ankeny, a divided Ninth Circuit panel declined to suppress the weapons that were discovered in Ankeny’s residence and used to charge him with, inter alia, being a felon in possession of firearms. Over Judge Reinhardt’s dissent, the majority held that suppression was an inappropriate remedy regardless of whether the search at issue was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Drawing on the Supreme Court’s recent knock-and-\",\"PeriodicalId\":48293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Yale Law Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Yale Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/20455807\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yale Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/20455807","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

凌晨5点半,就在黎明前,44名警察聚集在凯利·大卫·安凯尼位于波特兰的两层住宅前,执行对他的逮捕令。负责此案的警官花了数周时间制定逮捕Ankeny的计划,Ankeny是一名被定罪并被通缉的重罪犯,罪名是用枪支袭击他分居的妻子。在几秒钟内,全副武装的警察打破了大楼一楼的大门,而外面的其他人则通过大楼二楼的窗户发射橡皮子弹,玻璃喷射到房子里,在天花板和家具上留下了洞。遇到Ankeny的第一名警官用一支装在步枪上的手电筒对准他的眼睛,命令他趴在地上,而另一名警官则盲目地向房间里扔了一枚“闪光弹”。手榴弹在Ankeny的脸附近爆炸,造成了一级二级烧伤。与此同时,进入二楼的警察向一间被占用的卧室投掷了一枚闪光弹,点燃了床垫和弹簧箱,随后警察将床垫和弹簧箱扔出窗外。在确保了包括一名孕妇和一名一岁婴儿在内的住户的安全后,其中一名警官发来了以下短信:“BIG TIME FUN!!”到处都是碎玻璃,坏人跳到闪光弹上,大家都玩得很开心。”在美国诉Ankeny案中,一个意见分歧的第九巡回法庭小组拒绝查禁在Ankeny住所发现的武器,这些武器被用来指控他,除其他外,是一个拥有枪支的重罪犯。在莱因哈特法官的反对意见中,多数人认为,无论有关搜查是否符合第四修正案的规定,禁止搜查都是一种不适当的补救措施。利用最高法院最近的打击
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
United States V. Ankeny: Remedying the Fourth Amendment's Reasonable Manner Requirement
At 5:30 a.m., just before dawn, forty-four police officers converged on Kelly David Ankeny’s two-story Portland residence to execute a warrant for his arrest. The officers in charge had spent weeks crafting a plan to arrest Ankeny, a convicted and wanted felon, for assaulting his estranged wife with a firearm. In a matter of seconds, heavily armed police broke down the building’s firstfloor doors, while others outside fired rubber bullets through the building’s second-floor windows, spewing glass into the house and leaving holes in the ceiling and furniture. The first officer who encountered Ankeny pointed a riflemounted flashlight in his eyes and ordered him to the ground, just as a second officer blindly tossed a “flash-bang” grenade into the room. The grenade exploded near Ankeny’s face, causing firstand second-degree burns. Meanwhile, police entering the second floor threw a flash-bang into an occupied bedroom, setting fire to a mattress and box spring that the police then threw out of a window. After securing the occupants, including a pregnant woman and one-year-old infant, one of the officers sent the following text message: “BIG TIME FUN!! LOTS OF BROKEN GLASS, BAD GUY JUMPED ON THE FLASHBANG, GOOD TIME HAD BY ALL.” In United States v. Ankeny, a divided Ninth Circuit panel declined to suppress the weapons that were discovered in Ankeny’s residence and used to charge him with, inter alia, being a felon in possession of firearms. Over Judge Reinhardt’s dissent, the majority held that suppression was an inappropriate remedy regardless of whether the search at issue was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Drawing on the Supreme Court’s recent knock-and-
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Yale Law Journal Online is the online companion to The Yale Law Journal. It replaces The Pocket Part, which was the first such companion to be published by a leading law review. YLJ Online will continue The Pocket Part"s mission of augmenting the scholarship printed in The Yale Law Journal by providing original Essays, legal commentaries, responses to articles printed in the Journal, podcast and iTunes University recordings of various pieces, and other works by both established and emerging academics and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信