Recently, the Supreme Court reiterated that police may search a suspect when a trained drug sniffing dog indicates that the suspect is carrying drugs
or other illegal materials, and “all the facts surrounding a dog’s
alert, viewed through the lens of common sense, would make a reasonably
prudent person think that a search would reveal contraband or evidence
of a crime.” Thus, if police wish to search a suspect for drugs, but
lack a constitutional basis to do so, a drug dog can sniff the suspect
and provide police with probable cause for a search if the dog “alerts.”
In Washington state, however, it is no longer a crime
for someone of legal drinking age to carry up to an ounce of marijuana —
and that changes the constitutional status of dog sniff. If a dog is
trained to sniff out marijuana and cocaine, and it alerts after sniffing
an adult suspect, that no longer would lead a “reasonably prudent
person think that a search would reveal contraband or evidence of a
crime” because it is likely the dog only reacted to the presence of
marijuana on the suspect. Marijuana sniffing dogs cannot no longer
provide probable cause that a suspect is engaged in criminal activity,
because the dogs are trained to alert when the suspect is doing
something that is no longer illegal under state law.
As a result of this constitutional dilemma, several Washington state police departments are retraining their drug sniffing dogs:
Read on...
No comments:
Post a Comment