Connection lost
Server error
HUDSON v. MICHIGAN Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Police with a valid search warrant violated the “knock-and-announce” rule by entering a home too quickly. The Supreme Court held that this Fourth Amendment violation does not require suppression of the evidence found, as the exclusionary rule’s costs outweigh its deterrent benefits in this context.
Legal Significance: This case significantly limits the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule by holding it inapplicable to knock-and-announce violations. It establishes that suppression is not an automatic remedy for every constitutional violation, requiring a causal link between the interest protected by the rule and the evidence obtained.
HUDSON v. MICHIGAN Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Police obtained a valid warrant to search the home of petitioner Booker Hudson for drugs and firearms. When executing the warrant, officers announced their presence but waited only three to five seconds before turning the knob of the unlocked front door and entering. The State of Michigan conceded that this premature entry violated the Fourth Amendment’s “knock-and-announce” rule, as established in Wilson v. Arkansas. Inside, police discovered cocaine rocks in Hudson’s pocket and a loaded gun in his chair. Hudson was charged with unlawful drug and firearm possession. He filed a motion to suppress all inculpatory evidence as fruit of the unlawful entry. The Michigan trial court granted the motion, but the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed, holding that suppression is an inappropriate remedy for a knock-and-announce violation when the search is conducted pursuant to a valid warrant. After his conviction, Hudson’s appeals on the suppression issue were rejected by the Michigan appellate courts. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether the exclusionary rule is the proper remedy for a knock-and-announce violation.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s “knock-and-announce” rule require the suppression of evidence discovered during a search conducted pursuant to a valid warrant?
No. A violation of the knock-and-announce rule does not trigger the exclusionary Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis n
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s “knock-and-announce” rule require the suppression of evidence discovered during a search conducted pursuant to a valid warrant?
Conclusion
This decision creates a significant exception to the exclusionary rule, effectively detaching Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequa
Legal Rule
The exclusionary rule does not apply to violations of the Fourth Amendment's Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis au
Legal Analysis
The Court's analysis rests on two primary grounds: attenuation of the causal Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptat
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The exclusionary rule does not apply to violations of the Fourth