Whether a homeowner's repeated denials of consent to search during a 'knock and talk' establishes exigent circumstances, specifically that the destruction of evidence is imminent, to justify a warrantless entry and search of the home?

question presented is: Whether a homeowner’s repeated denials of consent to search during a “knock and talk” establishes exigent circumstances, specifically that the destruction of evidence is imminent, to justify a warrantless entry and search of the home? Assuming repeated denials of consent can constitute exigent circumstances, the second question presented is: . Whether officers impermissibly create exigent circumstances when their conduct during a “knock and talk” goes beyond what a private citizen would do, including by continually seeking consent to search when the homeowner has repeatedly denied consent and by stating that a search of the home is inevitable? i