Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Florida v. Harris, 568 U.S. 237 (2013), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court addressed the reliability of a dog sniff by a detection dog trained to identify narcotics, under the specific context of whether law enforcement's assertions that the dog is trained or certified is sufficient to establish probable cause for a search of a vehicle under the Fourth Amendment to the United ...
Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court case which resulted in the decision that police use of a trained detection dog to sniff for narcotics on the front porch of a private home is a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and therefore, without consent, requires both probable cause and a search warrant.
Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that the use of a drug-sniffing police dog during a routine traffic stop does not violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, even if the initial infraction is unrelated to drug offenses.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Detection dog training in U.S. Navy military for drug detection An English Springer Spaniel on duty as a detection dog with the British Transport Police at Waterloo station. A detection dog or sniffer dog is a dog that is trained to use its senses to detect substances such as explosives, illegal drugs, wildlife scat, semen, [1] currency, blood, and contraband electronics such as illicit mobile ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
A 52-year-old man and his dog have been stabbed to death in their own basement after an alleged intruder broke into their home, police said. The incident occurred on Monday morning at 11:42 a.m ...
He argued that the dog sniff was justified because the facts of the case "easily meet our standard for reasonable suspicion". [32] Justice Alito also criticized Justice Ginsburg's opinion for ignoring concerns of officer safety, and that the occupants of the car may have attacked the officer if he conducted the dog sniff before backup arrived. [33]