The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether the use of drug-sniffing dogs by police during routine traffic stops violates motorists' privacy rights.
The question the justices will consider this fall in an Illinois case is whether officers who make a routine traffic stop may walk a drug-sniffing dog around the car, even though the officers have no grounds to suspect any wrongdoing beyond the traffic violation. The case boils down to whether the sniffing of a dog amounts to a "search" that falls under the Fourth Amendment and its requirement that officers have a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing before conducting a search.
Illinois officials, and police organizations backing them, say the actions of drug-sniffing dogs are "uniquely unobtrusive" and can be likened those of officers who merely inspect a car's exterior.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled last year that using a police dog in a traffic stop when there is no reason to suspect illegal activity improperly expands the scope of a traffic stop and is unconstitutional. Other courts have ruled the opposite. In past cases, the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites) has said the sniff of a dog is far less intrusive than a typical police search. But it has never resolved the issue presented by the Illinois case.
Two groups of police chiefs have told the U.S. Supreme Court that the Illinois court's ruling "threatens to undermine the government's war on terror, which relies on canines to sniff vehicles and luggage for narcotics and explosives at large gatherings or at ... airports." But the Illinois case involves only searches of vehicles, not of people or belongings in airports, train stations or other public buildings where police have more latitude to conduct searches.
The Illinois case began in November 1998, when an Illinois trooper stopped Roy Caballes for going 71 mph in a 65 mph zone on Interstate 80 in LaSalle County. Another trooper heard a radio call about the stop and went to the scene with a dog. The first trooper asked Caballes if he could search the car; Caballes said no.
While the first trooper was writing a warning ticket, the other trooper led the dog around Caballes' car. The dog indicated drugs might be in the trunk. The troopers found marijuana that court papers said had a street value of $256,136. Caballes eventually was convicted of drug trafficking,sentenced to 12 years in prison and fined $256,136.
Caballes challenged his conviction, claiming that the drug evidence should not have been used against him because the troopers used the dog to do an illegal search. The Illinois Supreme Court agreed and said the officers "had nothing more than a vague hunch" about possible wrongdoing when the dog was used.
Caballes' attorney, Ralph Meczyk, said Monday that the use of a dog can be more intrusive than it appears because it typically prolongs a police stop. He also said there are no safeguards to ensure that police do not manipulate dogs to indicate the presence of drugs so that police can conduct more detailed searches.
In Illinois' appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, state Solicitor General Gary Feinerman relied on two high court cases that distinguished dog sniffs from police actions. He called a dog search a "non-event" under the Fourth Amendment.
"Because a canine sniff does not expose items that would otherwise remain hidden," he wrote, "information is obtained without the intrusion or discomfiture associated with a traditional search."
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. NoNonsense English offers this material non-commercially for research and educational purposes. I believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, i.e. the media service or newspaper which first published the article online and which is indicated at the top of the article unless otherwise specified.