Find Bill
Find Your Legislator
Legislative Deadlines
May 6, 2024
RSS Feed Permanent URL -A +A

Minutes for HB2133 - Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice

Short Title

Requiring a law enforcement officer executing a search warrant at residential premises to be uniformed and to knock and announce themselves before entering the property.

Minutes Content for Mon, Jan 24, 2022

Chairperson Owens opened the hearing on HB2133.  Natalie Scott reviewed the bill. (Attachment 1) There were no questions.

Representative Brett Fairchild testified in support of the bill and said he introduced the bill last year with five other representatives co-sponsoring the bill.  Representative Fairchild said he became interested in the issue after doing research and reading stories of no-knock raids that went poorly and resulted in abuse of law-abiding citizens around the country.  He then read a story about a no-knock raid that had devastating effects on a family in Georgia.  He acknowledged this event had not occurred in Kansas but he believed it could happen in Kansas as well and that we need to try to prevent anything like this from ever happening in Kansas.  Representative Fairchild said it is hard to find statistics that pertain exclusively to no-knock warrants, but he had found data regarding SWAT raids in general and he shared some of those statistics.  He concluded by saying he believes no-knock warrants have caused harm to both civilians and police officers and that he believes his bill is a first step in attempting to solve the problem. (Attachment 2)  He stood for questions.

Representative Rui Xu testified in support of the bill and said his testimony would be brief given that Representative Fairchild said most of what he would have said.  He said we should take a hard look at guard rails to put in place to protect individual freedoms, to protect the safety of law enforcement, and to protect the lives of innocent citizens.  (Attachment 3) There were no questions for Representative Xu.

Aileen Berquist testified in support of the bill and said the ACLU of Kansas supports the passage of this bill restricting the use of no-knock warrants as a first step toward banning this dangerous practice.  She said should take the opportunity to strengthen the bill as they review it.  Suggestions she provided to strengthen the bill included require law enforcement officers to wait at least 30 seconds for occupants to respond before entering the dwelling, restrict the execution of these warrants to normal waking hours, prohibit the use of flash bang devices during the execution of these warrants, and warrant applications should contain information related to the approximate ages and genders of other people in the building, the probable cause for entering the building, and weapons the suspect or others in the household may have.  She added that the bill should include mechanisms for enforcement and accountability of those effectuating warrants. (Attachment 4) Ms. Berquist stood for questions.

Matthew Clark testified in support of the bill and said search warrants executed with out knocking and continuously announcing their presence adds danger to law enforcement officers.  He said Kansans are a well armed population and they would take steps to protect their family and dwelling.  He stated they increase the chance of an officer being wounded or killed, increase the chance of innocent bystanders being wounded or killed, and increase the chance a suspect is killed instead of facing a jury of their peers for their suspected crime. (Attachment 5) Mr. Clark stood for questions.

Stacy Hanson testified in support of the bill and said she understands and appreciates the advantage of surprise to law enforcement in carrying out no-knock warrants but she does not agree with the legality of such warrants due to her concern for the safety of everyone involved, especially innocent bystanders.  She believes the element of surprise carries an increased risk to law enforcement officers.  People, both law-abiding and otherwise, who choose to arm themselves are likely to have a weapon close at hand, even at home.  Her primary concern is for the safety of the innocent people who happen to be in proximity of such activity. (Attachment 6) Ms. Hanson stood for questions.

Written only testimony in support of the bill was submitted by:

There was no neutral testimony.

Sheriff Jeff Easter testified in opposition to the bill on behalf of the Kansas Sheriffs' Association.  He stated that some of things that have brought this to the attention of everyone is what happened in Louisville, Kentucky with a no-knock search warrant.  He said tragedies have occurred, but he could talk non-stop about tragedies that have occurred to law enforcement by serving search warrants without no-knock and by serving search warrants with no-knock.  Serving search warrants is dangerous for law enforcement and sometimes for those inside.  No-knock search warrants were utilized more often in the 1990's than in this current period. Case law in the State of Kansas and the Supreme Court controls the analysis on no-knock warrants.  They are governed and are reviewed by a judge.  The times no-knock warrants are used today would be in a situation where the individual has very extensive criminal history and who are used to dealing with law enforcement, someone who has committed murder, has shot at people or shot at law enforcement or threatened to do so.  Last year in Sedgwick county, the sheriff's office did not apply for a single no-knock warrant.  They served approximately 120 warrants. (Attachment 11) There were no questions for Sheriff Easter.

Chief Mikel Golden testified in opposition to the bill.  He stated they have always limited no-knock search warrant executions because there is a time and place when they are required and it was reasonable.  He estimated they executed 30 search warrants last year and none of them were no-knock warrants.  He said a no-knock warrant does not allow the officers to do what they want and be reckless, it allows them to get inside the residence quicker to avoid an incident at the door.  Officers are announcing "Police Department Search Warrant" as they go through the residence; they just do not have to stand at the door announcing and waiting to take fire for those 10 seconds when the reasonable response would be to get in the residence as quickly as possible to protect lives and property. (Attachment 12) Chief Golden stood for questions.

Greg Smith testified in opposition to the bill.  Mr Smith stated that he has been in law enforcement for 25 years in 3 different states.  In that time, he had served 1 no-knock warrant.  No-knock warrants are not common practice but these types of warrants are necessary in special situations to protect officers and those in a residence or building that is being searched. (Attachment 13) There were no questions for Mr. Smith.

Major Joe Sudduth testified in opposition to the bill on behalf of the Kansas Peace Officers Association.  The organization stands in strong opposition to the bill.  Major Sudduth stated that what law enforcement does is tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving.  Therefore, their actions needed to be judged on objectively reasonableness standards to be determined by the judicial branch.  He said everything else had been stated by others that have testified today. (Attachment 14) There were no questions for Major Sudduth.

Representative Timothy Johnson testified in opposition to the bill.  Representative Johnson said that going without no-knock warrants will endanger people.  He said his second issue was "what is a uniform" and that if it isn't defined, an attorney will challenge the search warrant in court. (Attachment 15) There were no questions for Representative Johnson.

Written only testimony in opposition of the bill was submitted by:

  • John Goodyear, General Counsel, League of Kansas Municipalities (Attachment 16)
  • Steve Kearney, Executive Director, Kansas County and District Attorney's Association (Attachment 17)

Chairperson Owens closed the hearing on HB2213.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:40 PM