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 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 901-902 next last
Comment #101 Removed by Moderator

To: Al Gator
"Maybe you like getting your crotch sniffed, but I don't."

honestly I don't usually mind this, as long as there are no police or dogs involved

:-)

102 posted on 01/24/2005 10:12:16 AM PST by t_skoz ("let me be who I am - let me kick out the jams!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
I would be nervous too -- with 282 pounds of marijuana in he trunk.

I recall that the 9/11 hijackers weren't very nervous. I know how much you hate drugs but try to get a little perspective.

103 posted on 01/24/2005 10:12:16 AM PST by palmer ("Oh you heartless gloaters")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
I guess we all know which way the court will be deciding when probes and sensors are devised that can peer into your house.

The USSC has already ruled on that. Can't do it without a valid search warrant.

104 posted on 01/24/2005 10:13:18 AM PST by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: palmer
I know how much you hate drugs but try to get a little perspective.

Hehhe... good luck with that...

105 posted on 01/24/2005 10:14:03 AM PST by Dead Corpse (Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
Can't do it without a valid search warrant.

Actually, using this case as support, they could now go back and get a different ruling.

Bet on it.

106 posted on 01/24/2005 10:15:05 AM PST by Dead Corpse (Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz; Mo1; Howlin; Peach; BeforeISleep; kimmie7; 4integrity; BigSkyFreeper; RandallFlagg; ...
Illinois v. Caballes

Court opinion

107 posted on 01/24/2005 10:15:13 AM PST by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta

Unless you're carrying a couple of kilos what difference does it make if a dog sniffs your car ? Loss of freedom is what the homos are doing to us by creating special laws against free speech. Bomb and drug sniffing dogs are good for society.


108 posted on 01/24/2005 10:15:47 AM PST by John Lenin (You have to be a lunatic yourself to appeal to the RAT base)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
I have friends from other countries, a few have settled here, and without fail, they remark "You Americans think you are free. Maybe once you were, but now, you live in a police state that rivals that of East Germany."

I'm not a fan of WOD, but the main two freedoms in this country are the freedom to complain about government and the freedom to engage in commerce. I am more concerned about the erosion of free commerce than I am the erosion of freedon to ingest drugs.

We have been through prohibition and survived. We can survive this.

109 posted on 01/24/2005 10:16:08 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #110 Removed by Moderator

To: Individual Rights in NJ

Most of the women cops where I live are lesbians. It's not an exaggeration. A guy I worked with wife was trying to get on the force. She was told by a superior that if she wasn't a lesbian, she better act like one. I know that gets away from the original thread, but it's true.


111 posted on 01/24/2005 10:17:03 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

Bet on this:

At the next "seat belt" or "sobriety" checkpoint, there stands Johnny Fascist with his barking dog, ready to be sure you are a "good" subject.


112 posted on 01/24/2005 10:17:24 AM PST by Al Gator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: NEPA

Me too...I'm surprised that Justice Thomas would be in the majority here.


113 posted on 01/24/2005 10:18:07 AM PST by libertyman (Dims = tax & SPEND; GOP = borrow & SPEND. Either way, WE'RE SCREWED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #114 Removed by Moderator

To: Lazamataz
"I have friends from other countries, a few have settled here, and without fail, they remark "You Americans think you are free. Maybe once you were, but now, you live in a police state that rivals that of East Germany."

Your friends are right! We keep saying we are free but saying it and being free are 2 different things. There are things going on that we used to laugh at the communists for doing. The 4th amendment no longer exists except on paper. Some JBT will always find a way around the former right to privacy.

115 posted on 01/24/2005 10:18:25 AM PST by Wurlitzer (I have the biggest organ in my town {;o))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

The point is that drugs probably shouldn't be illegal in the current capacity in the first place. The only thing the current WOD has led to is an increase in the price of drugs, the resulting increases in crime, general lawlessness, and losses of the 2nd, 4th, 9th, and 10th Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Meanwhile, our streets, schools, military and even maximum security prisons are filled with drugs. Crooked cops and politicians are lining their pockets and the pockets of their friends and we're being screwed out of our freedoms at every turn.

No thanks!


116 posted on 01/24/2005 10:20:24 AM PST by t_skoz ("let me be who I am - let me kick out the jams!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

Comment #117 Removed by Moderator

To: Lazamataz
Conspiracy
118 posted on 01/24/2005 10:20:40 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin
Unless you're carrying a couple of kilos what difference does it make if a dog sniffs your car ?

A free man does not need to give a reason for wanting to maintain his privacy. I personally have nothing to hide, but I still don't want the cops going through my car on a hunch.

Loss of freedom is what the homos are doing to us by creating special laws against free speech.

Non-sequitur.

119 posted on 01/24/2005 10:21:37 AM PST by Modernman (What is moral is what you feel good after. - Ernest Hemingway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

The decision was made because of the WOD... when are we going to learn that the WOD is hurting is far more than it was ever first thought.

When are we going to claim our freedom back and let the junkies take their own lives?


120 posted on 01/24/2005 10:21:59 AM PST by Almondjoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: thompsonsjkc
"Maybe the SCOTUS needs a refresher on the Fourth Amendment."

Since they have no concern for the rights of Americans, perhaps we can strap them each to a gurney and make them listen to "The Constitution" audio book at about 100 decibels over and over again for 72 hours straight.
121 posted on 01/24/2005 10:22:23 AM PST by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I used to be able to choose my own doctor. (Actually I still could were I as rich as members of the Ruling Classes.)


122 posted on 01/24/2005 10:22:31 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: t_skoz

I think you need to drive by a crack house and think again. Drugs make you stupid and eventually they catch up to a person, I don't care who you are. I've seen it with my own eyes, people who handled drugs really well for a while that turned into psychos when they get high.


123 posted on 01/24/2005 10:23:34 AM PST by John Lenin (You have to be a lunatic yourself to appeal to the RAT base)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: John Lenin

Loss of freedom is never a good thing. It is taken away by inches so we don't notice. I think the Constitution is meaningless now anyway. Maybe we should start all over and write a new one.


124 posted on 01/24/2005 10:23:38 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

The cops have been salavating to set up "drug checkpoints" for years.

If I'm not mistaken, they were shot down by this same court.

Well, this ruling gives them the back door they've been wanting.

Mark this, at sobriety checks you will now see at least two or three dogs.


125 posted on 01/24/2005 10:23:47 AM PST by Al Gator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Papers!?! VHERE ARE YOUR PAPERS!?!

My God...I agree with Ginsburg and Breyer. Is this a sign of the apocolypse?


126 posted on 01/24/2005 10:24:04 AM PST by IGOTMINE (Please arm yourself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: contemplator
"Not even close. Thoughts and ideas are not illegal here."

Three words: hate crimes legislation
127 posted on 01/24/2005 10:24:15 AM PST by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Another day, another privacy lost.

Yes. The innate right to not having a dog breathe next to your car.

Next is the innate right to not have police look at you.

128 posted on 01/24/2005 10:26:43 AM PST by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
"There goes that Amendment. Strike "unreasonable search" from the record."

The 4th amendment was rendered superfluous the first time that the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment authorized "reasonable" search and siezures.

This interpretation of the 4th amendment is a common error made by the citizenry and the courts.

The first part of the 4th amendment, similar to the 2nd amendment, is a "description" as to why there is a need for the amemdment and the second part of the 4th amendment describes the "ONLY" proper procedures that must be followed in order to search citizens and seize their property.

Allowing for "reasonable" search and seizures without sworn warrants being issued is ludicrous and is anti-liberty because that means every search and seizure has to be litigated for "reasonableness."

Again, the intent of the 4th amendment was to prevent "reasonable" search and seizures without a warrant.

129 posted on 01/24/2005 10:27:59 AM PST by tahiti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
they have gunpowder sniffing dogs. When they start using those more Freepers will be inconvenienced.

Apples and Oranges. Drugs are illegal. Guns are not.

130 posted on 01/24/2005 10:28:42 AM PST by m1-lightning (God, Guns, and Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

Go through these things a couple of times, your attitude WILL change.

Till then, lets just do a drug search on your house. If you got nothing to hide, you won't mind.


131 posted on 01/24/2005 10:28:42 AM PST by Al Gator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: IGOTMINE

Ginsburg and Souter.


132 posted on 01/24/2005 10:29:03 AM PST by notigar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

Thanks.


133 posted on 01/24/2005 10:29:04 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Oh, it's just drugs, Laz. It's not like they can train dogs to sniff gun powder or gun oil.


134 posted on 01/24/2005 10:29:12 AM PST by TigersEye (Intellectuals only exist if you think they do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Thanks for posting. Over at Volokh, Orin Kerr has some interesting info on how Justice Steven's opinion here had to be reconciled with a ruling of his a few years back.

With what we're stuck with now, it's more about what is obtained (i.e. drugs, as in "war on") rather than the manner in which it was obtained. Another sad day for freedom.
135 posted on 01/24/2005 10:29:52 AM PST by Akira (Experience is a hard teacher, but fools will have no other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Individual Rights in NJ
Uhhh municipal cops are dirt.

I'll tell my son that so he can keep your sentiment in mind if he ever pulls over a drunk driver in your neighborhood.

136 posted on 01/24/2005 10:30:11 AM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

The case to which I was referring is less than two years old.


137 posted on 01/24/2005 10:30:14 AM PST by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: contemplator
" Thoughts and ideas are not illegal here."

Well not always! Ever hear of hate crimes where the government needs to get into your head to determine what you were thinking. Instead of hate crimes they simply need to increase the jail term for the actual crime. The result is the same without the government getting into thought policing.

138 posted on 01/24/2005 10:31:04 AM PST by Wurlitzer (I have the biggest organ in my town {;o))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

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

Sure they are. Carry one in NYC and see what happens.

139 posted on 01/24/2005 10:31:45 AM PST by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Was there ever any doubt of the outcome?


140 posted on 01/24/2005 10:32:00 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arkinsaw
"I don't think they can do X-Ray machines because it requires an intrusion of particles on their part. But they can do heat, light, etc. because heat for example comes out of your body and home on its own and becomes open game. Sort of like garbage on the curb is abandoned property. Your heat signatures are essentially abandoned property."

See: NSA's TEMPEST. You'd be shocked and amazed what you can tell about what's going on inside a person's home just from the patterns of electromagnetic interference generated.
141 posted on 01/24/2005 10:32:17 AM PST by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent

Oh goodness, me. I actually do things to preserve and exercise my freedom. What are YOU doing besides posting on FR? What was the last FOIA request you filed? Do you have YOUR FBI file?

I decry the Laz's and NJ_gents of the world that fiddle while Rome burns. That is the real ostrich.

The inexorable power grab of the government already HAS affected me -- and I defended myself. And I won. That doesn't happen in a police state.

Inactive whiners, though, are a dime-a-dozen, police-state or free utopia.


142 posted on 01/24/2005 10:33:38 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Yep - not a good decision. It's another step in a little direction I like to call conditioning.
143 posted on 01/24/2005 10:33:50 AM PST by AD from SpringBay (We have the government we allow and deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigs from the North

This just "shows to go ya" that if you have drugs in your car, don't give the cops any excuse to pull you over! Don't speed, make sure you drive perfectly, & avoid accidents. Just transport your drugs back to the house (or their intended location) & get 'em outta the car.


144 posted on 01/24/2005 10:34:18 AM PST by libertyman (Dims = tax & SPEND; GOP = borrow & SPEND. Either way, WE'RE SCREWED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: montag813
"But then again, it was a "nervous" Algerian Muslim at the Washington/Canadian border"

When it comes to the border and people trying to enter this country, especially now, I have no problem with blanket cavity searches. Defend the borders and we won't have a need for garbage like this inside our country.
145 posted on 01/24/2005 10:34:18 AM PST by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: JeffAtlanta

Is it illegal to have a gun in your car in NYC? This case was in Illinois. I live in Illinois. I can have a gun in my car in Illinois. Therefore it's apples and oranges.


146 posted on 01/24/2005 10:34:30 AM PST by m1-lightning (God, Guns, and Country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

What happened to the concept of a "search warrant"? This Supreme Court has been awful on issues of privacy.


147 posted on 01/24/2005 10:34:45 AM PST by The Westerner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813
Washington/Canadian border

Borders are a completely different thing. They have the right to search anyone or everyone for any reason when crossing a border. You have no expectations or rights crossing international lines. However, a citizen within these borders, used to have the expectation of certain rights, such as not being searched.

148 posted on 01/24/2005 10:34:47 AM PST by bird4four4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
"Robert Paulsen actually defended, virulently, a crooked cop who was caught planting drug evidence on over 80 people. There is utterly no point in conversing with this person."

Hey Laz. You got 10 minutes to post an apology.

I never defended a crooked cop. I certainly didn't defend one who was ever charged, much less convivcted, of planting drugs.

149 posted on 01/24/2005 10:35:47 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Seek
This ruling allows dog-drug searches on the basis of someone acting "nervous."

Whether a person is acting nervous really has nothing to do with this.

A dog sniff for drugs isn't even considered a search.

Official conduct that does not compromise any legitimate interest in privacy is not a search subject to the Fourth Amendment. We have held that any interest in possessing contraband cannot be deemed legitimate, and thus, governmental conduct that only reveals the possession of contraband compromises no legitimate privacy interest. This is because the expectation that certain facts will not come to the attention of the authorities is not the same as an interest in privacy that society is prepared to consider reasonable.
[quote marks and citations omitted]
Essentially, if in the normal course of a legitimate traffic stop there happens to be drug-sniffing dog on the scene, the dog can sniff around the vehicle regardless of whether the driver seems suspicious. If it ain't considered a search, no reasonable suspicion is necessary unless the cop tries to keep you detained after he's finished checking your tag and your license and writing your ticket and whatnot.
150 posted on 01/24/2005 10:36:06 AM PST by Sandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 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