No knock warrant?

[Insignificant bill]

It is what the title states; an authorization sought from a judge by the affiant to enter without prior notice to anyone within.

They were most often sought in cases involving the arrest of known armed/violent persons, dangerous persons known to flee, or in drug cases where evidence can be destroyed prior to entry.

The issuing judge/magistrate reviews the PC for the warrant, in this case in Arkansas it was a search warrant, and will ok or deny the no-knock request based on the information in the affidavit.

Obviously the entire ball of facts haven’t been released so anything said by anyone not in the know is mere speculation, but based on my three decades doing the job there are other operational avenues available than doing an early-service no-knock in a case involving alleged firearm reselling without a license (As was just reported by NBC News).

Stay safe.

Yep they could have arrested this guy when he left for work or at work. This was deliberate to make an example of this guy.

 

[Riomouse911]

Yep they could have arrested this guy when he left for work or at work. This was deliberate to make an example of this guy.

Feds seem to do things different. I don’t know why, but they do.

Stay safe.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Yep they could have arrested this guy when he left for work or at work. ...

It was a search warrant. It was served at the premises to be searched.

 

[Jim Watson]

While it seems they had ample justification for pursuing him, he had to have come to Official Attention somehow. There are untold numbers of wheeler dealers out there that they could just as well collect, too. We had one here but they did not prosecute him until he violated more than just "doing business without a license."

And the circumstances that led to him shooting at the feds. If they actually broke in on him, it would be likely. I wonder if we will ever get to see take from his Ring, and body/car cameras.

 

[Spats McGee]

I have good news and bad news: I'm a criminal defense lawyer in AR, but I have no experience in dealing with the interplay between Arkansas criminal law and federal criminal statutes and rules. I've never prosecuted or defended a federal criminal case, so I've never needed to go down that rabbit hole.

Anyway, as others have noted, a no-knock warrant is just what it sounds like: a warrant allowing law enforcement to execute the warrant without knocking & announcing their presence. (And just in case someone runs across them, we also have a line of cases in Arkansas that we call the "knock and talk" cases. They're not relevant here, because they're not warrant cases. They deal with the police just walking up to a residence, knocking and talking to whoever answers.) Generally speaking, no-knock warrants are disfavored in Arkansas, but police seek them in cases where there is some specific danger, either related to confrontation with the police, or destruction of evidence, or something along those lines.

Also worth noting, but not especially relevant here, is the fact that it was issued as a daytime warrant. Like no-knock warrants, nighttime warrants are disfavored and (should) only be issued when there is a specific, articulated reason that the warrant cannot be served during the day. (When the pdf from the link opens on my computer, the boxes to be checked for that are on p. 37.) I say it isn't relevant here, just because this one was issued as a daytime warrant, and appears to have been executed during the daytime.

Finally, I notice on p. 2 of my pdf that the box for "a person to be arrested or a person who is unlawfully restrained" is not checked. IOW, if LE were looking to arrest Malinowski right then and there, this warrant didn't give them that authority.

 

[RickD427]

It was a search warrant. It was served at the premises to be searched.

^^^THIS^^^

A Search Warrant and an Arrest Warrant are two very different things (although they can be combined as in a Steagald Warrant). Most criminal investigations proceed along a timeline where the the Search Warrant precedes the Arrest Warrant, specifically that the evidence obtained from the Search Warrant is used to establish the required "Probable Cause" for the Arrest Warrant. There's a "Bootstrapping" process involved. The LEO needs "Probable Cause" that someone did a crime to get a Search Warrant. He/she/it/other needs "Probable Cause" that the person to arrested did the crime in order to get an Arrest Warrant. Most jurisdictions require that criminal charges have already been filed in order to get an Arrest Warrant.

But the important question here is whether the Search Warrant was served in an intelligent manner. IMHO, too many agencies serve Search Warrants in a manner that needlessly endanger their officers and the public, and do so primarily for the PR value in doing so. "No Knock" warrants have their place, and their corresponding risks. But the best way to handle violent contact is to avoid it. From what I've read of this case, there was no need to serve the warrant when the suspect was home. The evidence sought would most likely have been firearms and records of firearm transactions. That evidence isn't going anywhere, and you don't need the presence of the suspect to access it. Wait until you know that he's at work and the house is empty, then serve the warrant.

 

[Insignificant bill]

^^^THIS^^^

A Search Warrant and an Arrest Warrant are two very different things (although they can be combined as in a Steagald Warrant). Most criminal investigations proceed along a timeline where the the Search Warrant precedes the Arrest Warrant, specifically that the evidence obtained from the Search Warrant is used to establish the required "Probable Cause" for the Arrest Warrant. There's a "Bootstrapping" process involved. The LEO needs "Probable Cause" that someone did a crime to get a Search Warrant. He/she/it/other needs "Probable Cause" that the person to arrested did the crime in order to get an Arrest Warrant. Most jurisdictions require that criminal charges have already been filed in order to get an Arrest Warrant.

But the important question here is whether the Search Warrant was served in an intelligent manner. IMHO, too many agencies serve Search Warrants in a manner that needlessly endanger their officers and the public, and do so primarily for the PR value in doing so. "No Knock" warrants have their place, and their corresponding risks. But the best way to handle violent contact is to avoid it. From what I've read of this case, there was no need to serve the warrant when the suspect was home. The evidence sought would most likely have been firearms and records of firearm transactions. That evidence isn't going anywhere, and you don't need the presence of the suspect to access it. Wait until you know that he's at work and the house is empty, then serve the warrant.

I guess that was really my point. Make it the least confrontational as possible. They have to be doing it as a PR move, this is what happens if we decide you are selling firearms without a license. Kind of a gestapo move.

 

[Anchorite]

I have good news and bad news: I'm a criminal defense lawyer in AR, but I have no experience in dealing with the interplay between Arkansas criminal law and federal criminal statutes and rules. I've never prosecuted or defended a federal criminal case, so I've never needed to go down that rabbit hole.

Anyway, as others have noted, a no-knock warrant is just what it sounds like: a warrant allowing law enforcement to execute the warrant without knocking & announcing their presence. (And just in case someone runs across them, we also have a line of cases in Arkansas that we call the "knock and talk" cases. They're not relevant here, because they're not warrant cases. They deal with the police just walking up to a residence, knocking and talking to whoever answers.) Generally speaking, no-knock warrants are disfavored in Arkansas, but police seek them in cases where there is some specific danger, either related to confrontation with the police, or destruction of evidence, or something along those lines.

Also worth noting, but not especially relevant here, is the fact that it was issued as a daytime warrant. Like no-knock warrants, nighttime warrants are disfavored and (should) only be issued when there is a specific, articulated reason that the warrant cannot be served during the day. (When the pdf from the link opens on my computer, the boxes to be checked for that are on p. 37.) I say it isn't relevant here, just because this one was issued as a daytime warrant, and appears to have been executed during the daytime.

Finally, I notice on p. 2 of my pdf that the box for "a person to be arrested or a person who is unlawfully restrained" is not checked. IOW, if LE were looking to arrest Malinowski right then and there, this warrant didn't give them that authority.

We’ve had a few instances in south Alabama where a no-knock was served and gunfire erupted. Just within the last few months the city of Mobile served a NK warrant and a young man was shot - but he did not fire a shot.
Currently a lot of debate about police procedures. The city of Mobile is under excruciating pressure now, but the city council cannot set police protocols, only the mayor can. So we are entering a new era of police politics, city council posturing and mayoral edicts at the local level.
It’s going to be interesting to see how this plays out with the war on drugs running in the background.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

No knock warrants are EXCEEDINGLY dangerous, especially when they get the wrong address, on top of poor planning and execution.

If a group of someones broke into my house unannounced, especially at night, that's a recipe for a serious disaster of extraordinary magnitude, given the use of deadly force laws in place in my state when it comes to self-defense.

And the unforgivable part of this is that an armed response on my part to a perceived home invasion by burglars is almost certainly going to result in my death AND THE STATE WILL FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL TO PLACE ALL THE BLAME ON ME AND LEAVE MY FAMILY DESTITUTE WITHOUT A HUSBAND OR FATHER.

And any financial payout would come at a cost to the tax payers, for both the inevitable trial and whatever award, instead of out of the pockets of the police agency(ies) involved.

 

[Spats McGee]

No knock warrants are EXCEEDINGLY dangerous, especially when they get the wrong address, on top of poor planning and execution.

If a group of someones broke into my house unannounced, especially at night, that's a recipe for a serious disaster of extraordinary magnitude, given the use of deadly force laws in place in my state when it comes to self-defense.

And the unforgivable part of this is that an armed response on my part to a perceived home invasion by burglars is almost certainly going to result in my death AND THE STATE WILL FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL TO PLACE ALL THE BLAME ON ME AND LEAVE MY FAMILY DESTITUTE WITHOUT A HUSBAND OR FATHER.

And any financial payout would come at a cost to the tax payers, for both the inevitable trial and whatever award, instead of out of the pockets of the police agency(ies) involved.

Let's make no mistake about this: Those of us who keep guns at home for SD (and that's likely to approach 100% of THR members), and especially those in urban or suburban areas, face this exact risk. The chances of it happening may be low, but they are not zero.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Let's make no mistake about this: Those of us who keep guns at home for SD (and that's likely to approach 100% of THR members), and especially those in urban or suburban areas, face this exact risk. The chances of it happening may be low, but they are not zero.

Yes...and it's an absolutely predictable outcome with a legal morass that they absolutely should NOT be willing to set up and take to the courts.

It's a more dangerous version of another law enforcement action I fear may eventually lead to a tragic ending, namely that one of these days someone is going to take a civil asset forfeiture attempt an illegal action by law enforcement amounting to armed robbery. Which many such forfeitures really are, despite what the laws and the supreme court have said.

These things are STUPIDLY dangerous and ought to be treated as extreme exceptions to the rule.

I work in a dangerous environment, like many people do (whether they realize it or not). Working on electrical/electronic equipment which requires equipment entry nearly ALWAYS requires securing and isolating electrical power to it BEFORE entry. Work on energized equipment under less than 30 volts requires a particular set of permissions and procedures. OVER 30 volts, however, is an entirely different beast in which DEATH is a very real possibility. There's an entirely DIFFERENT set of permissions and procedures required for that and NEVER entertained as something done for convenience or scheduling. And in the exceptionally rare instances in which such work IS required, all kinds of planning is done to minimize and mitigate the risks to the maximum extent practicable.

No Knock Warrants should be treated similarly at all times.

"We wanna do this by No Knock Warrant because (justifiable reasons) and an arrest warrant."

*judge grants No Knock Warrant*

*Law Enforcement puts into place plans to execute the warrant under conditions where it is known the premises are not being occupied, makes arrangements to set up an arrest separate from the premises, sets up a plan to intercept their suspect outside the premises as he goes to his vehicle for work, etc.*

The point being that arming and armoring a SWAT team for a literal breaking and entering of a premises where they KNOW there is a high risk of potentially legal danger is NOT by itself sufficient for risk management. LEOs ought to be trained and supervised not to treat these things as if all the tools they have are hammers, because then all their problems look like nails.

 

[Insignificant bill]

Let's make no mistake about this: Those of us who keep guns at home for SD (and that's likely to approach 100% of THR members), and especially those in urban or suburban areas, face this exact risk. The chances of it happening may be low, but they are not zero.

Absolutely has happened in Houston and DFW. Especially over drugs