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 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 901-902 next last
To: Fiddlstix
I think any American over the age of 60 can attest to lost freedom. My heavens, the things we used to do and think nothing of it. Now you need a "license" of some kind for almost everything.

Well said.

But of course, we who are in our 40's also have very dramatic observations of freedom lost.

61 posted on 01/24/2005 9:51:25 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Bigs from the North
you need to get a grip, there is no violation of any freedom here. Goodness, the man was checked for carrying ILLEGAL drugs. what part of illegal do you not understand.

The only way the case can reach the Supreme Court is if the defendant did have illegal drugs. How many people have been stopped, detained and searched before illegal drugs were found?
62 posted on 01/24/2005 9:51:38 AM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: contemplator
Thoughts and ideas are not illegal here.

Not quite true. Some acts may be crimes depending on what you were thinking at the time.

63 posted on 01/24/2005 9:52:36 AM PST by FreePaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Apparently, all they need to do is add some biological sensing unit and it all becomes okay again.

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]

To: palmer
It's even worse when it bites.

Has that happened to you more than once?

65 posted on 01/24/2005 9:55:04 AM PST by Wheee The People (Oo ee oo ah ah, ting tang, walla-walla bing bang. Oo ee oo ah ah, ting tang, walla-walla bing bang!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

Comment #66 Removed by Moderator

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

Try being politically incorrect at work. Call someone a n***er in public. See how fast you will wind up in jail.

67 posted on 01/24/2005 9:55:57 AM PST by Centurion2000 (Nations do not survive by setting examples for others. Nations survive by making examples of others)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Individual Rights in NJ
I'll join anyone in any sort of appeal.

You can't appeal a Supreme Court ruling.

68 posted on 01/24/2005 9:56:13 AM PST by palmer ("Oh you heartless gloaters")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

You miss jumping thru one of those hoops and you'll find out what you have to do.

BigMack


69 posted on 01/24/2005 9:56:52 AM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain (aka: Horselifter, Mackdaddy:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: ellery

People are not "seized" by a traffic stop. They are seized when they are arrested. This is a horrible ruling. The SC is so out of control and will only continue to get worse. I know they have jobs for life, but maybe it's time to rethink some type of term limits or mandatory retirement age. These justices live in their own little worlds and have no one to answer to.


70 posted on 01/24/2005 9:56:58 AM PST by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
But of course, we who are in our 40's also have very dramatic observations of freedom lost.

Yeah, but where were you when the Mustang came out? That was all about freedom...


71 posted on 01/24/2005 9:57:05 AM PST by pageonetoo (I could name them, but you'll spot their posts soon enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | 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.

So is this one of those "you have no rights in an automobile" rulings? I do recall that the Supreme Court has never been friendly to individual rights of anyone in a car.

What part of "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, " are they missing? A car is certainly an effect, and is a portable abode (house). It can be thought of as an extension of the person.

72 posted on 01/24/2005 9:57:06 AM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

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

Police already patrol self storage places with dogs. The owner of the facility lets them on the property and lets the dogs sniff around the doorways. Although a person has an expectation of privacy for things within the storage room, it has been ruled that any scents (even if it takes a dog to detect them) that emanate from the room are not private.

Ending the war on drugs is really the only way to stop the assault on our liberties.

73 posted on 01/24/2005 9:57:31 AM PST by JeffAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Sad, isn't it. Maybe judges should have read the BILL OF RIGHTS berfore making that decision.


74 posted on 01/24/2005 9:57:34 AM PST by struggle ((The struggle continues))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #75 Removed by Moderator

To: Wheee The People

Only when I act nervous.


76 posted on 01/24/2005 9:59:50 AM PST by palmer ("Oh you heartless gloaters")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Individual Rights in NJ

Unfortunately it's now "precedent" and the Supremes don't like to go against precendent.


77 posted on 01/24/2005 10:01:05 AM PST by palmer ("Oh you heartless gloaters")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

Comment #78 Removed by Moderator

To: Lazamataz

I've lived in Europe. I've been to East Germany long before the wall came down. What you see depicted by Hollywood isn't far from the truth. Wise up.


79 posted on 01/24/2005 10:01:47 AM PST by ampat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: ampat
Yeah. It was just peachy. We need that here right?

(/heaving stomach sarcasm)

80 posted on 01/24/2005 10:02:42 AM PST by Dead Corpse (Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 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