Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins
As a matter of fact, the Supreme Court ruled a couple of years ago that even bringing out a police dog now requires a warrant. If it is not visible and perceptible to a human, they have to get a warrant to look for it. Even then, they can only detain you for a "reasonable amount of time", which the courts have ruled is about ten to fifteen minutes, before they have to arrest you or let you go.
|
I could be wrong, but I don't think that is entirely correct.
AFAIK, Police can (and do) still deploy K9's for perimeter sniffs without any warrant required. The dog usually comes out after a suspect refuses consent for a vehicle search. I believe the only difference now (as of a couple years ago?) is that you can't be detained for any unreasonable amount of time to wait for a K9 to show up. If the K9 is already there, or arrives prior to a citation being written/given (or what would be considered a "reasonable" amount of time to issue a citation), then it's fair game. Of course, if/when a dog indicates during a perimeter sniff, that gives further PC for an interior search.
It's still a method with plenty of potential for abuse and rights violations, IMO. Not only can a dog's "indications" (hits) be up for interpretation (or completely made up), but another "trick" is to leave a suspect's car door wide open if/when pulling them out prior to a K9 walk-around. The dog then pokes it's nose in and "indicates", legally allowing it to go inside the vehicle (and then a subsequent full search by the officer).
Another trick is when someone refuses consent to search during a citation that has the potential for the vehicle to be towed/impounded.
If an officer makes the call to have a car towed, they are typically allowed to "inventory" the contents prior to the tow.