Commonwealth v. Hession
This text of 18 Mass. L. Rptr. 97 (Commonwealth v. Hession) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The credible evidence before me is that the Yarmouth Police knocked and announced who they were and that they had a search warrant on two occasions before breaching the front door with a so-called “battering ram.” The rule in Commonwealth v. Cwidrtff, 382 Mass. 137, 140-47 (1980), is that “before attempting forcibly to enter a private dwelling to execute a warrant, police must knock, announce their identity, and state their purpose . . .” The police in these matters did exactly that. The time lapse between the first knock and the forcible entry was 20 seconds, not unlike the facts in Commonwealth v. Antoine, 417 Mass. 637, 638 (1994). MOTION IS DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 Mass. L. Rptr. 97, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-hession-masssuperct-2004.