Police entered my enclosed porch area to investigate a report without my consent or knowledge, are they allowed to do that?

10 October 2025

Maybe not.  It depends on the totality of the circumstances and whether your enclosed porch area was considered “curtilage” of your home at the time, however, it looks promising because generally police cannot enter the curtilage of your home to investigate without an qualified exception.

First, we must understand the basics of what the fourth amendment covers and the analysis to apply.  The Fourth Amendment protects an individual’s right to be free from unreasonable seizure and this includes one’s home. U.S. Const. amend. IV.  In the realm protected by the Fourth Amendment, the “home is first among equals.” Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1, 6 (2013). To give practical effect to the protection of the home, its “curtilage” — the area “immediately surrounding and associated with the home” — is treated as “part of the home itself” and subject to the same heightened protection. Id. (quoting Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170, 180 (1984)).  Generally, when police enter curtilage they are entering area protected under the fourth amendment and one exception is to perform a “knock and talk.” French v. Merrill, 15 F.4th 116, 132-33 (1st Cir. 2021).

There can be instances where police exceed the limits of the knock and talk exception.  In French v. Merrill the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed a decision dismissing a fourth amendment claim of a resident in Maine where the police had entered the curtilage of his home without a warrant to investigate a report he had stolen his ex-girlfriend’s phone.  The officers had entered an enclosed porch to knock on a front door, waited a reasonable time without response, and then left.  All of this was fine.  French v. Merrill, 15 F.4th 116, 132-33 (1st Cir. 2021).  But they continued their investigation and returned to enter the curtilage, which is where the French court believed they crossed the line.  After the unsuccessful knock and talk, one officer walked onto a neighbor’s property to obtain an unobstructed view of the home and saw someone in a window that closed it upon the flashing of a flash light.  Id.  The officers ended up entering the porch again (the curtilage) again and knocking causing a dog to bark and then peered through a window to see someone inside.  Id.  They continued knocking on the door, walked to a window frame and knocked on it, and yelled for Mr. French to come outside, which eventually lead to interaction with Mr. French at the doorway.  Id.  The court note that “[b]y the time French came to the door, the officers had entered his property four times.  Id.

The French court found that the officers “exceeded the limited scope of the customary social license to “approach the home by the front path, knock promptly, wait briefly to be received, and then (absent invitation to linger longer) leave.” French v. Merrill, 15 F. 4th 116, 133-34 (1st Cir. 2021) quoting Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1, 8 (2013).

It is important to maintain the legal integrity of your home to dissuade the proper enjoyment of the home from officials.  However, fourth amendment analysis is a substantive undertaking.  The author recommends a person believing a violation has occurred obtain a qualified, legal opinion before taking legal action, and even then, there may still be gray area to sort through.  Along with the commitment to see a valid action through to completion, you might be on your way to victory in a successful claim.