The dog can't apply for a warrant. The officer's interpretation is just that...interpretation. If the officer/dog pair can't be cross examined in court in front of a jury, anything the pair invents is simply crap. The officer needs to have a warrant that explicitly states what is sought. If he needs the dog's help as a "sensor", that is a different issue. The search doesn't start until the warrant is presented.
“The search doesn’t start until the warrant is presented.”
I thought you were saying that the warrant shouldn’t be valid because the dog’s reaction is interpreted and the officer/pair can’t be cross-examined.
But the officer’s interpretation of the dog reaction is used regularly in court, isn’t it?