Skip to content
Name: People v. Rabaduex
Case #: C041818
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 11/04/2003
Subsequent History: Rehrg. den. 12/1/03; Rev. granted 1/28/04: S121159
Summary

Knock-notice violations are a privacy interest only if present. Rabaduex was charged with 199 offenses arising out of his sexual acts with his live-in girlfriend’s daughter. He moved to suppress evidence obtained from a search of his girlfriend’s house because the police did not comply with knock-notice requirements, as they waited only 30 seconds after announcing themselves before using a key to open the house. (The girlfriend was asleep, and the house had a sign on it which notified officers that the owner was a “day sleeper.” Also, the minor victim told the officers her mother was sleeping.) The appellate court here held that the motion to suppress was properly denied because the knock-notice violation was not a violation of defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights, as he was not present when it occurred. Knock-notice violations are not the same as the privacy interest infringed by an invalid search which should not have occurred at all. The interest infringed must be those which belong to the defendant seeking suppression.