# Adcock v. Commonwealth

> Kentucky Supreme Court · April 16, 1998 · 967 S.W.2d 6

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9772261

## Case

- **Full name:** Cynthia Lane ADCOCK, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee
- **Court:** Kentucky Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 16, 1998
- **Citations:** 967 S.W.2d 6; 1998 Ky. LEXIS 59; 1998 WL 178596
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Stumbo
- **Judges:** Cooper, Graves, Johnstone, Lambert, Wintersheimer, Stumbo, Stephen
- **Cited by:** 110 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9772261

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding ruse entry is permissible under the Fourth Amendment to execute a warrant

## Opinion text

STUMBO, Justice,
dissents.
Respectfully, I must dissent. This opinion will send the message that officers seeking to execute a search warrant no longer must evaluate the circumstances surrounding execution for exigent circumstances. Simply pretend to be the pizza man or the Avon lady, it says. Once the door is opened to the ruse, announce your true identity and all is well. Never mind that in the future, the nervous homeowner, who may well have some nefarious activity ongoing, may decide that any erroneously directed delivery person is a disguised law enforcement officer and react with tragic results.
The United States Supreme Court has defined the circumstances requiring a knock- and-announce entry into a private residence. Exigent circumstances have likewise been the subject of much legal writing. This case falls within none of the exceptions set forth in those opinions and simply serves to demonstrate that the Court’s reverence for the sanctity of the individual’s home is no longer of paramount importance in the Commonwealth. I cannot agree with the majority and dread the day when fruits of this opinion arrive for this Court’s review.
STEPHENS, C.J., joins.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9772261. Public record. Not legal advice.