Skip to comments.High Court Rules Dog Sniff During Traffic Stop OK Without Suspicion Of Drugs
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 ...
I used to be able to choose my own doctor. (Actually I still could were I as rich as members of the Ruling Classes.)
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.
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.
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.
Papers!?! VHERE ARE YOUR PAPERS!?!
My God...I agree with Ginsburg and Breyer. Is this a sign of the apocolypse?
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.
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.
Apples and Oranges. Drugs are illegal. Guns are not.
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.
Ginsburg and Souter.
Oh, it's just drugs, Laz. It's not like they can train dogs to sniff gun powder or gun oil.
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.
The case to which I was referring is less than two years old.
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.
Sure they are. Carry one in NYC and see what happens.
Was there ever any doubt of the outcome?
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.