Peer
United States v. Peer
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Appellant, Keith Peer, appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846.
We find that Peer’s first argument— that the officers who executed a search warrant on the residence he shared with Co-Defendant Michelle Mitchell violated the Fourth Amendment and the “knock and announce” statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3109— is foreclosed by United States v. Banks, 540 U.S. 31 , 124 S.Ct. 521 , 157 L.Ed.2d 343 (2003).
In Banks , the Supreme Court considered the issue of whether this Court properly found that officers executing a warrant to search for cocaine in a private apartment acted unreasonably in waiting only fifteen to twenty seconds after knocking and announcing before making a forcible entry. 540 U.S. at 33 , 124 S.Ct. 521 . The Court concluded that they did not, given the existence of an exigency which ripened during the fifteen to twenty second period during which the officers were waiting. Id. at 38 , 124 S.Ct. 521 .
*142 The present case is similar to Banks in that it involved execution of a warrant at a private residence for suspected drug-related activity — possession and sale of methamphetamine.…
Concurring Opinion
Rawlinson, J.
concurring.
I concur in the result.