Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

High Court Rules Dog Sniff During Traffic Stop OK Without Suspicion Of Drugs
Associated Press ^ | 1/24/2005

Posted on 01/24/2005 9:20:02 AM PST by Lazamataz

The Supreme Court gave police broader search powers Monday during traffic stops, ruling that drug-sniffing dogs can be used to check out motorists even if officers have no reason to suspect they may be carrying narcotics.

In a 6-2 decision, the court sided with Illinois police who stopped Roy Caballes in 1998 along Interstate 80 for driving 6 miles over the speed limit. Although Caballes lawfully produced his driver's license, troopers brought over a drug dog after Caballes seemed nervous.

Caballes argued the Fourth Amendment protects motorists from searches such as dog sniffing, but Justice John Paul Stevens disagreed, reasoning that the privacy intrusion was minimal.

"The dog sniff was performed on the exterior of respondent's car while he was lawfully seized for a traffic violation. Any intrusion on respondent's privacy expectations does not rise to the level of a constitutionally cognizable infringement," Stevens wrote.

In a dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg bemoaned what she called the broadening of police search powers, saying the use of drug dogs will make routine traffic stops more "adversarial." She was joined in her dissent in part by Justice David H. Souter.

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: billofrights; fourthamendment; greatidea; illegalsearch; policestate; privacy; prohibition; scotus; waronsomedrugs; wodlist; workingdogs; wosd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 901-902 next last
To: m1-lightning
Wow. You just went from private property to public property. So it's OKAY for a cop to catch you breaking the law on private property but not on public property? It's that backwards from the 4th amendment?

There is a world of difference between someone doing something illegal in plain view (such as growing pot in their front yard) and someone driving along apparently following the law.

321 posted on 01/24/2005 11:52:45 AM PST by Modernman (What is moral is what you feel good after. - Ernest Hemingway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
"Too bad. It's for the chirren. We'd like to care but we don't. Please pull over to the side and wait in line."

Yeah, that's the part I don't care for. If they want to run a drug dog by my car when I get pulled over for speeding, then they better have it done by the time my speeding ticket is written. I'd give them 10 minutes to check my license, run my plates, and write my ticket.

322 posted on 01/24/2005 11:53:00 AM PST by m1-lightning (God, Guns, and Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

It is far easier to teach a dog to "alert" on command than to train it to "alert" upon discovery of any particular substance or odor.

I have no faith in the majority of police dog training programs.


323 posted on 01/24/2005 11:53:05 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (RLK was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: rottweiller_inc

I and 99% of cops are glad they got him.


324 posted on 01/24/2005 11:53:09 AM PST by blueknight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Not nearly that much is needed.


325 posted on 01/24/2005 11:53:21 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

To: Bigs from the North
the bill of rights and the constitution is not a suicide pact

If "safety" means no bill of rights or constitution under it's original intent, then count me out.

I'll take the 'suicide pact' over BS safety every single time. It's my job to protect myself and my family. Not governemnt which isn't trustworthy enough, nor competent enough to do so.

326 posted on 01/24/2005 11:54:03 AM PST by Dan from Michigan ("We clearly screwed up on the communications," Detroit Mayor Kilpatrick - after caught in a lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
There is a world of difference between someone doing something illegal in plain view (such as growing pot in their front yard) and someone driving along apparently following the law.

The man in the news story was not obeying the law and had pot odor emitting from his vehicle. Whether it's a visual or an odor, it's probable cause. That's relative to the situation.

327 posted on 01/24/2005 11:55:47 AM PST by m1-lightning (God, Guns, and Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: Awestruck

I don't believe a cop needs evidence to investigate, only suspicion. I believe a cop investigates to get evidence. Otherwise we only need officers to sit at the station and wait for a complaint. IMHO


328 posted on 01/24/2005 11:56:03 AM PST by westmichman (Pray for global warming. (Thank G-D for the red states))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

No, IIRC the distinction is that they are not allowed to see into our houses without probable cause, regardless of what type of sensor is used.


64 posted on 01/24/2005 9:53:34 AM PST by Moonman62 (Republican - The political party for the living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]




Weeeeeeeeeell There you have it. Now you know why Jorge Arbusto wanted to enlist all those Public workers, electic meter readers, phone company employees, millions of service workes to report suspicious activities so the Jack booted Thugs could claim evidence of criminal activities and do a sealed search without your notification for 60-90 days AFTER the search.

Just like the Gestopo. Use snitches and cowards to turn in innocent people for the attention it gets them.


329 posted on 01/24/2005 11:56:46 AM PST by Area51 (Illegal Immigration: 20 Million Mexicans can't be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com


Later, dude.
330 posted on 01/24/2005 11:56:48 AM PST by John Lenin (You have to be a lunatic yourself to appeal to the RAT base)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Thread was/is interesting read

As a "biker", I am subjected to many stops in any given year for some of the silliest reasons you ever want to hear. Failure to signal is the easiest one....my word against his, dontcha know....they all come under the heading of hassasment stops and a part of my life. Many times I have to pull everything off the ride and lay it out for thorough inspection and play the silly game. The only time I have ever been ticketed, was for a really bogus charge the judge threw out of court after he read the summons.

This ruling is going to cause more citizens to be treated in a similar manner simply because of appearance, type of vehicle, origin of plate, length of hair, hours of travel etc.

Erosion of freedoms.

331 posted on 01/24/2005 11:57:40 AM PST by 506trooper (No such thing as too much guns, ammo or fuel on board...unless you're on fire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

There seem to be a lot of "Living Document Conservatives" around when the Constitution gets in their way.


332 posted on 01/24/2005 11:57:59 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
They've already decided on that (infrared cameras). It's not allowed.

I thought infrared imaging of neighborhoods was a matter of routine, to find people who are growing pot. Likewise, "large" electric bills are reported.

333 posted on 01/24/2005 12:01:06 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: m1-lightning
Apples and Oranges. Drugs are illegal. Guns are not.

Are you sure. You're probably breaking one gun laws somewhere depending on your state.

334 posted on 01/24/2005 12:03:04 PM PST by Dan from Michigan ("We clearly screwed up on the communications," Detroit Mayor Kilpatrick - after caught in a lie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
The state trooper noticed air freshener in the car and asked for permission to search Caballes' trunk. Caballes refused, but officers searched it later anyway after the dog indicated there were drugs in the trunk.

The dog "indictated" there were drugs?? Didi he say what kind and how much?

This is ridiculous, dogs are not positive indictors and should only be relied upon as an aid in search and rescue, bomb sniffing at airports and the like, etc.

I would have argued this case differently. that a dog "indication" is not proof, therefore no search should be allowed.

335 posted on 01/24/2005 12:03:43 PM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic

There seem to be a lot of "Living Document Conservatives" around when the Constitution gets in their way.



332 posted on 01/24/2005 11:57:59 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]




They run with the Big Government Conservatives and have dinner alot with the Amnesty for Illegals Conservatives.

I just refer to them as cheap political whores, or RINOS for short.


336 posted on 01/24/2005 12:04:16 PM PST by Area51 (Illegal Immigration: 20 Million Mexicans can't be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: blueknight
I and 99% of cops are glad they got him.

Like I said, you are one of the "good guys".

Call it a vibe. ;^)

337 posted on 01/24/2005 12:04:18 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

Comment #338 Removed by Moderator

To: Dan from Michigan
You're probably breaking one gun laws somewhere depending on your state.

Chicago doesn't respect my second amendment right, therefore I don't respect Chicago. I don't live anywhere near Chicago just for that reason.

339 posted on 01/24/2005 12:07:00 PM PST by m1-lightning (God, Guns, and Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: MileHi
Really? So what laws, rules, regulations or other government intrusions have been removed since then that have caused you to be so much more free than your ancestors were?

Myopic.

It's not just regulation but real economic freedom. In real terms I am freer than my ancestor farmers were during the dust bowl. That's obvious. They had no freedom to travel, write blogs, argue political dissent, petition the government, publish, marry for happiness, etc.

They NEVER got paid a day in their life to be sick like I can.

In very real terms I have more tangible freedom than they ever could hope for.

I don't want to lose any of this either, and I think the dog sniffing ruling (and current attempts in the Texas Lege to get DWI checkpoints) are horrendous and need to be pushed back.

But I only took offense at Laz's hyperbole that we're worse off than East Germany. I don't have to drive a Trabi.

340 posted on 01/24/2005 12:07:30 PM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 901-902 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson