Discrete. Effective. Aggressive.
Trial Attorneys
Free Case Evaluation

Supreme Court considers drug dogs and the Fourth Amendment: part two

Last week we introduced two cases recently heard by the United States Supreme Court. The court has taken up several issues surrounding the use of drug-sniffing dogs in arrests and criminal investigations that could have lasting effects on Americans' due process rights and criminal defense.

The Supreme Court essentially must decide two things: whether a dog's sniff outside a home constitutes a "search" under the Fourth Amendment and whether standards should exist for determining the reliability of any given dog for the purposes of justifying a search. However, these two seemingly simple questions must be considered in the context of criminal defense and how they could interact with existing policy.

For example, in 1983 the Court found that allowing a drug dog to sniff a piece of luggage at an airport was not a "search" under the Fourth Amendment. As a result, police officers could allow dogs to sniff luggage without establishing probable cause or getting a warrant. A 2005 cases extended that definition to automobiles as well.

In 2006 the Court also ruled that it was reasonable to use SWAT teams to serve search warrants for low-level drug offenses. Police officers in that case had seized evidence after breaking into a house to serve a warrant, failing to knock and announce themselves.

Each of these decisions may seem small on its own, but when applied to real cases and stretched to their limits they gradually but surely begin to erode the constitutional rights of defendants in drug-related cases. If the Court finds that a sniff outside a door creates probable cause, police officers could realistically use SWAT-style tactics to break into a house based only on the hunch of an unreliable dog and its handler.

If you are facing charges or have been accused of a drug-related criminal offense, seek help from an experienced criminal defense attorney as soon as possible. Prosecutors and investigators often take their time to build a case so you should act before it becomes urgent. An attorney can help your build a defense and seek the best possible outcome in your case while ensuring that your constitutional rights are protected in the criminal justice system.

Source: The Huffington Post, "Supreme Court Considers Two Drug Dog Cases," Radley Balko, Nov. 2, 2012

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information

Real Results

Winning Cases They Say Can't Be Won

Travis Noble is a graduate of the National College for DUI Defense at Harvard University, and he lectures at seminars nationwide on DWI/DUI topics. He is the lawyer whom other lawyers consult to defend their DWI clients. Most importantly, he has a track record of successfully defending some of the toughest DWI cases in Missouri and beyond.

Contact Travis Noble | Free Consultations

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy

Travis L. Noble, Jr.
Rated by Super Lawyers


loading ...

Past results afford no guarantee of future results and every case is different and must be judged on its own merits. The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. This disclosure is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Missouri.

At Travis Noble, P.C. we value your feedback. Click here to write us a review:

Write Us a Review
TN - Travis Noble - Attorneys at Law

8000 Maryland Avenue, Suite 910
St. Louis, MO 63105
St. Louis Law Office Map

Free Consultations
Phone: 314-450-7849
Toll Free: 866-794-0947
Click Here to Pay Your Invoice
Credit Cards Accepted