The police officers are supposed to knock on the door of a premise they intend to search. This regulation is known as the “knock-and-announce rule,” although it is only reasonable in incidences where police officers do not anticipate the retaliatory attack. The officers must allow a logical duration before they force entry into the property during warrant execution. According to the Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 358 (1997) case, a no-knock entry is acceptable if the action is pointless or endangers the officers. Besides, knocking is unnecessary if it would inhibit efficient crime investigation.
In case the police have an “anticipatory search warrant,” they can only execute it upon a specific action happening. Courts issue anticipatory warrants when they expect that evidence will be available at a certain point in the future. For instance, the police may seek an anticipatory warrant for a safe deposit containing drugs to arrest the person who will open the storage space. However, anticipatory warrants must describe the people, places, and things that the officers must search during the order’s implementation.
Since December 2009, Rule 41 has allowed police officers to copy electronic data for later review and put tracking devices on property and individuals to monitor their whereabouts. Usually, the officers should enforce a warrant between 6.00 a.m and 10.00 p.m, except in sensitive cases such as drug trafficking, where they can search premises or people at any time. Since the warrant should specify the items, people, and places to be searched, officers should avoid looking for items in places they cannot be. For example, an officer looking for a riffle should avoid opening small jewelry boxes. Similarly, officers should only search people who are not listed on a warrant if they have adequate evidence that the individuals are blameworthy.