knock and talk
{{Short description|Investigative technique in law enforcement}}
In law enforcement, a knock and talk is an investigative technique where one or more police officers approaches a private residence, knocks on the door, and requests consent from the owner to search the residence.{{cite journal |last=Holcomb |first=Jayne |date=August 2006 |title=Knock and Talks |url=http://leb.fbi.gov/2006-pdfs/leb-august-2006 |journal=FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin |volume=75 |issue=8 |pages=22–32 |access-date=2014-11-15}} This strategy is often utilised when criminal activity is suspected, but there is not sufficient evidence to obtain a search warrant.
In the United States
The legality of the knock and talk procedure has been carefully scrutinized and reviewed by American courts at the state and federal level.{{cite web |url=http://www.kscourts.org/Cases-and-Opinions/opinions/ctapp/2000/20001208/83746.htm |title=State v. Dwyer |date=December 8, 2000 |website=Kansas Judicial Branch |publisher=Kansas Judicial Center |access-date=June 18, 2014}}{{cite journal |date=November 2001 |title=The "knock and talk" tactic is held to be constitutional. |url=http://www.michigan.gov/documents/november2001_8722_7.PDF |journal=Legal Update |publisher=Michigan State Police Training Division |volume=6 |issue=9 |pages=1–2 |access-date=June 18, 2014}} Rulings in both the Ninth Circuit case United States v. Cormier and Seventh Circuit case United States v. Jerez have held that evidence obtained from a consensual search following a knock and talk is admissible, but only if the knock and talk is not conducted in a coercive or aggressive manner. Per Bumper v. North Carolina, the use of deception to obtain consent can also in some cases prevent the search from being upheld.{{Citation needed|date=July 2021}}
Per Kentucky v. King, when a police officer who is not armed with a search warrant knocks on a door and requests the opportunity to speak, the occupant has no obligation to open the door or to speak.{{cite web | url=https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/216733/kentucky-v-king/ | title=Kentucky v. King }}