논문 : 수사상 압수수색영장의 제시 -미국의 Knock and Announce Rule과의 비교-

Search and seizure warrant is a court order issued by judge that authorizes police officers to conduct a search of a person or location for evidence of a crime and to confiscate evidence. Criminal Procedure typically require search warrants for searches conducted as part of a criminal investigation. It is required that search warrant be presented to guarantee the due process of search warrant and protect of accused rights when enforcing the search warrant, But, it is not obvious when it should be showed and the scope of presentation. This study examined issues related to presentation of search warrant and compared ‘Knock and Announce Rule’ in America. Knock-and-announce Rule is an ancient common-law principle, incorporated into the Fourth Amendment in U. S. Constitution, which often requires law enforcement officers to announce their presence and provide residents with an opportunity to open the door prior to search. In Hudson v. Michigan (2006), the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that a violation of the knock-and-announce rule does not require the suppression of evidence using the exclusionary rule. This is primarily because the goals served by a knock-and-announce policy tend to be lesser than other requirements (such as the warrant requirement) of a valid Fourth-Amendment search To guarantee the legality of the enforcement of search warrant, search warrant be presented prior to the enforcement. But, it is necessary to grant the exception of presentation in case the police officer have probable cause to believe that there is possibility to destruct the evidence.