TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (WCTV) – The Florida Supreme Court has overturned a longstanding precedent that required evidence to be tossed out if it was obtained during a search where law enforcement violated the state’s knock-and-announce statue.
The 6-1 decision issued on Thursday said evidence gathered during a search warrant execution could not be suppressed only because officers failed to comply with Florida’s law which requires law enforcement to knock, announce their authority and purpose and wait to be let in before forcibly entering a home.
Thursday’s ruling reverses the court’s decision in a 2010 case, State v. Cable, where evidence was allowed to be suppressed as a “remedy” for a knock-and-announce violation. The court determined it “erred” in it’s decision in Cable’s case.
“Having determined that a remedy of exclusion is not required nor authorized by section 933.09, we conclude that our decision in Cable was wrongly decided,” the majority opinion read.
The case stems from a search conducted in Leon County in 2021. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement and local law enforcement announced 27 arrests in a drug trafficking investigation “Operation No Warning.” Investigators said the drug-trafficking organization was responsible for distributing large amounts of illegal drugs throughout Florida, including Leon and Gadsden counties.
Keith Times was among those arrested. He asked a trial court to toss out evidence in his case, claiming law enforcement violated the knock-and-announce statue.
According to court documents, law enforcement obtained a search warrant for a Leon County residence believed to be involved in the drug-trafficking operation. FDLE and the Tallahassee Police Department “knocked multiple times and announced their presence twice,” before using a battering ram to enter the home.
Court documents note law enforcement did not state they had a warrant until “seconds before entry.” Officers found cocaine, “Molly,” over $23,000 in cash and two firearms in the home, court records show.
Times was charged with trafficking amphetamines, possession of cocaine and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.
The trial court agreed to suppress the evidence, saying a resident is not required to open the door until the officer announces they have a warrant and, in this case, “the occupants were not given sufficient time after the officer announced the warrant to answer the door.”
The State appealed and the First District Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court’s ruling, however, noted that the requirement to suppress evidence in these types of violations was “the minority position” among other states that have handled similar cases.
The State then asked the Florida Supreme Court to review the First District Court’s decision.
In the majority opinion, written by Justice Ricky Sasso, the court focused on legality rather than constitutional law. The court said the knock-and-announce statue “does not authorize, let alone require, the suppression of evidence.” However, it does “threaten wayward police officer with criminal penalties.”
Justice Carlos Labarga did not agree with the majorities ruling. In his dissent, Labarga said the court has “applied the exclusionary rule to violations of the knock-and-announce statues” since 1964 and that he would agree with the court’s ruling in Cable’s case.
“Cable did not ‘supply’ a remedy for knock-and-announce violations, as the majority claims, Labarga wrote. ”Rather, Cable merely approved of the ‘judicial remedy of exclusion of evidence’ which Florida courts had been applying to remedy statutory knock-and-announce violations since Benefield.”
The case now goes back to the First District for reconsideration without the requirement to suppress evidence.
The Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers responded to Thursday’s ruling, saying the criminal penalty in favor of suppressing evidence in these cases is “a decoration” not a remedy.
“Today’s opinion tells Floridians that when police unlawfully break into a home in violation of knock-and-announce, the remedy is not suppression. The remedy, according to the Court, is that prosecutors can charge the officer with a second-degree misdemeanor, Aaron Wayt, President of the FACDL said.
FACDL said it remains “deeply concerned that removing suppression as a remedy weakens one of the few meaningful protections Floridians have against unlawful forced entry to their homes.”
To keep up with the latest news as it develops, follow WCTV on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Nextdoor and X (Twitter).
Have a news tip or see an error? Write to us here. Please include the article’s headline in your message.
Be the first to see all the biggest headlines by downloading the WCTV News app. Click here to get started.
Copyright 2026 WCTV. All rights reserved.