rejecting the dissent's assertion that an officer - 32 - "exceeded the scope of the permissible knock and talk exception because it was 1:30 a.m., he unholstered his weapon, and he knocked so loudly"
How later courts described this case
- rejecting the dissent's assertion that an officer - 32 - "exceeded the scope of the permissible knock and talk exception because it was 1:30 a.m., he unholstered his weapon, and he knocked so loudly"
- “When police unilaterally manufacture alarm and urgency that the situation at hand clearly does not warrant, the law does not—and must not—grant them qualified immunity for a deadly split-second decision.”
- “[Ojrders denying rehearing en banc, even this published one, have no binding or precedential value”
- “en banc rehearing is similar to . . . certiorari”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
BY THE COURT:
A petition for rehearing having been filed and a member of this Court in active service having requested a poll on whether this case should be reheard by the Court sitting en banc, and a majority of the judges in active service on this Court having voted against granting a rehearing en banc, it is ORDERED that this case will not be reheard en banc.