Page:State v. Brown.pdf/1

460 STATE of Arkansas v. Jaye M. BROWN and Michael C. Williams

CR 03-914

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Opinion delivered March 25, 2004

[Rehearing denied May 6, 2004.] 
 * 1) C.—Because the appeal raised a significant search-and-seizure issue involving the procedure known as "knock and talk," it was a matter that concerned the correct and uniform administration of the criminal law and that required review by the supreme court [Ark. R. App. P.—Crim. 3(c)]; the supreme court had jurisdiction to review the matter.
 * 2) S.—A warrantless entry into a private home is presumptively unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment; however, the presumption of unreasonableness may be overcome if the law-enforcement officer obtained the consent of the homeowner to conduct a warrantless search.
 * 3) S.—The State has a heavy burden to prove by clear and positive testimony that a consent to search was freely and voluntarily given; a valid consent to search must be voluntary; voluntariness is a question of fact to be determined from all the circumstances.
 * 4) S.—Any consent to search given must be unequivocal and may not usually be implied; the State must prove by clear and positive testimony that the consent to enter and search was unequivocal and specific.
 * 5) S F A.—The "knock-and-talk" procedure is not per se violative of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution; the Fourth Amendment does not require knowledge of the right to refuse consent as a prerequisite to a showing of voluntary consent.