Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eugene

(62,657 posts)
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:38 PM Feb 2013

Supreme Court upholds police "dog sniff" of truck

Source: Reuters

Supreme Court upholds police "dog sniff" of truck

By Jonathan Stempel
WASHINGTON | Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:09am EST

(Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously upheld a trained police dog's search of a truck for evidence, saying that training and testing records had established the dog's reliability and given the police probable cause.

The case was one of two the court has been considering this term about the validity of evidence obtained by drug-sniffing dogs and had been watched closely by criminal defense advocates.

At issue was the work of Aldo, a German shepherd whose "free air sniff" helped his police handler find methamphetamine ingredients inside Clayton Harris' pickup truck after it had been pulled over in Liberty County, Florida, in 2006.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote that the police officer reasonably believed there was contraband inside the truck after Aldo gave off an alert to its contents.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/19/us-usa-court-dog-sniffs-idUSBRE91I0RB20130219
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court upholds police "dog sniff" of truck (Original Post) Eugene Feb 2013 OP
Good decision. virgogal Feb 2013 #1
I can say good decision because it's Meth Politicalboi Feb 2013 #2
The decision would apply to pot too. What you are supporting is the dogs being used to ferret out TheKentuckian Feb 2013 #4
So by this rationale, the local drug dog should be retired. sybylla Feb 2013 #3

TheKentuckian

(26,241 posts)
4. The decision would apply to pot too. What you are supporting is the dogs being used to ferret out
Tue Feb 26, 2013, 02:17 PM
Feb 2013

probable cause. Other than what was found in the case, meth has nothing to do with the rendering at all. You think the precedent set only applies to meth? I don't get it.

The dogs themselves are a form or search that should require at least probable cause (reasonable suspicion, I sez), not a method to find probable cause. What kind of horseshit is that? Liberal justices my fucking ass. You cannot always side with power to the government from the people and be liberal.

For any folks that only have one benchmark, Roe v. Wade, you might want to wrap your heads around the actual basis of the decision which is PRIVACY. Silly folks pooh pooing privacy concerns will be stuck with their thumbs up their patooties as the whole works come apart around us, crown jewels and all.

sybylla

(8,655 posts)
3. So by this rationale, the local drug dog should be retired.
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 10:13 PM
Feb 2013

They bring the dog into the local school once or twice a year. It always marks on a couple of cars in the lot and a couple of lockers. Yet, years of this activity, years of calling students out of class to have their cars/lockers searched has produced nothing. Zero.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Civil Liberties»Supreme Court upholds pol...