It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

To Sniff or Not to Sniff? Supreme Court to Decide if Drug Dog's Nose Went Too Far

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
This will be an interesting case. I knew that the SC had ruled on similar circumstances in the past, but wasnt sure of the details. Here are some details from the 4 previous cases:


The US Supreme Court has heard four dog sniffing cases before – two of the previous cases involved the use of drug dogs after a traffic stop, one involved airport luggage, and the other one involved a package in transit. If they argue this case, it will be the first one that includes a dog and a private residence. Again and again, the US Supreme court has ruled that the home is entitled to greater privacy than roads or public places. The Justices ruled in 2001 that police could not use thermal imaging technology to detect marijuana grows from outside the home since the equipment could also detect lawful activity, such as intimate details about when the occupants were bathing. And it is already well established, that officers can knock on your front door, but if you refuse to open up and talk, the officers need a warrant, and to get a warrant they need evidence of a crime.


source

Should the private home be offered greater protection under the law than public buildings or vehicles after a lawful stop? The SC has ruled before that it has. Will the SC 'handcuff' the police in this case, only time will tell.

I think that they will rule in favor of the convicted in this case and overrule the finding.




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
What I couldn't tell is if the dog was actually on the property or on the sidewalk. If the scent had drifted to a public easment (sidewalk, street), then it is no longer private. If the dog was actually on the property sniffing at the doors and windows, that is a search without a warrant.

That being said, I wouldn't agree with a warrant on a dog trigger alone. Seems to me that that is no proof of anything if no suspicious activity is presented.

All in all not enough information in the article (that I saw) to make a solid call, but I think this was probably a violation of the 4th.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
First homes then what. next cars in public parking lots??

Sheriff joe's officers down in AZ routinely pull over rental trucks then use there drug dogs and if the dog alerts to the truck the officers will unload some poor persons belongings on the ground alongside the highway and if they don't find any thing the cops just get back in there cars and drive away leaving the people to re-box and reload all there property.

I worked for a truck rental company and on a number of times i found stems and seeds in the back when cleaning the trucks.

What happens if the next people that rent the truck get pulled over.
And this could go on for years with different people that rent the truck.

What happens if they do this with cars in parking lots will the cops tow the car and search it leaving it at a towed vehicle impound lot when they don't find anything.
And then would the owners end up paying for the towing and impound fees to get there cars back when they did nothing and the cops found nothing.

At many airport parking lots the cops likely could find a half dozen cars a day that the dogs would alert on and if they used a impound lot say run by a retired officer could make a lot of money.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
I hope the SC makes the right decision...
The cops are always bring dogs to where I live and go up and down all the parking lots having it sniff vehicles...
There is never anything in my car, but it bothers me that I can be singled out based on where I live... The cops see it is low income earners, they must all be druggies..

There is also a little trick that the cops do with drug dogs.
They can make the dog signal a false positive by other means in order to get the warrant... (they do this all the time in traffic stops)...

While we are at it, if your looking for weed, why use a dog???
My cat could locate some weed in your pocket from a block away...
He hates people who hold out...



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gwampo
DRUGS > TERRORISTS


US pharmaceuticals are promoted in their profitable application to turn millions of Americans into braindead subserviants, but growing a plant is worse than terrorism? (or have I misread?)
edit on 10-1-2012 by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


The amount found has nothing to do with whether it is consitutional or not. Logic.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


From what the video said it looks like the dog hit the sniff at the end of the guys driveway.

But it's ridiculous. If someone has 10 dollars in weed for personal use and a dog sniffs it at their driveway that gives them the right to raid a home? This is a huge slippery slope of tyranny and total police state.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


By your own definition the smell is already out in the open. In the public domain. Or are you actually claiming that property owners have a right to restrict what senses can be used on their property? You might as well argue that if they see anything criminal or hear anything criminal they shouldn't do anything.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   
They ain't worried about him growing 700k in bud...

And who comes up with these prices anyways? Like they got a cop that inflates street value?


The USA govt is more concerned they didn't get their cut of the supposed 700k, but don't worry I'm sure all that money the police "confiscated" will make it back into the community.... Yeah.. right.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


It's ironic that you can have prescription derivatives of all illegal "Street drugs"



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogerstigers
What I couldn't tell is if the dog was actually on the property or on the sidewalk. If the scent had drifted to a public easment (sidewalk, street), then it is no longer private.


How can the cops be sure which house it is coming from if it has waifted so far?



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   
It is a Drug sniffer Dog.
it finds drugs.
what next? you can not search my bag?
when the dog says you have drugs...



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


It's ironic that you can have prescription derivatives of all illegal "Street drugs"


At like, ten times the cost and potency.

I always find it quite amusing at how coc aine used to be sold casually at drug stores in the early 1900s. There wasn't drug cartels murdering tens of thousands or crackheads lining the streets back in those days.



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


Only 10x the cost if you don't have insurance



posted on Jan, 13 2012 @ 03:57 AM
link   


This is ridiculous. This is unreasonable search and seizure. Why are the cops not going after violent crimes? The rapes, murders, car jacking, robberies. Not someone growing a plant.

The supreme court already decided that using thermal imaging to be illegal, how is a dog nose is any different? A house is PRIVATE. Bringing a police dog on a private house to sniff is a search. The dog is searching FOR drugs.


Unfortunately that's the "War on Drugs" for you. This #s got to stop, Hemp has hundreds if not thousands of uses for it, but the Government can't make any money from illegal street trading so they instead make millions/billions by confiscating... and then re-selling! Without ever touching the drugs, this is the a perfect method for funding a black budget. Money which is off the records and can be spent which ever way they want.

The war on drugs bring in a # load money ever year.



This is ridiculous. This is unreasonable search and seizure. Why are the cops not going after violent crimes? The rapes, murders, car jacking, robberies. Not someone growing a plant.


But yeah I agree with your opening statement, in the UK, all the police seem to do is catch young weed-smokers.. big waste of time and tax payers money when there are murderers, rapists and paedophiles committing horrible crimes every day.

I hate the world we live in.




top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join