Here I am.

I'm no expert, and I haven't read the opinion yet. From what I've heard, the warrant requirement is still alive and well, and Mr. NonGrata's take is spot on -- as usual.

Sounds like Hudson v. Michigan is merely an extension of the earlier line of "knock and announce" cases (beginning with Wilson v. Arkansas), the progeny of which contained several exceptions to that requirement. This appears to be the most recent in a long line of exceptions to The Exclusionary Rule -- which is also still alive and well.

But, I was absent that day, so...

__________________