Law Office of John W. Noonan
925-400-6635 Call For A Free Initial Consultation Se Habla EspaƱol Available 24/7

SCOTUS weighs in on use of drug-sniffing dogs during stops

Back in 1971, as some readers here in Dublin may remember, then President Nixon dramatically declared a "war on drugs," as is explained by the Drug Policy Alliance. In the years that followed, drug agencies grew in size and strength, resulting in hundreds of thousands of drug charges and equally as many convictions. Although drug detection techniques have become more sophisticated over the years, one staple has remained the same for generations: the drug-sniffing dog.

But the use of the drug-sniffing dog to find drugs and other illegal substances has fallen under intense scrutiny by citizens as well as the courts over the years. From the highly publicized case of Florida v. Jardines to the recent case of Rodriguez v. United States, the debate over whether the use of drug-sniffing dogs constitutes an illegal search and seizure has been left up to the country's highest court to decide.

And in Rodriguez v. United States, the high court delivered a decision some were not surprised to hear.

For those who have not been following the case through the courts, it asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the parameters of a traffic stop in order to determine when an officer has overstepped their bounds and has violated a person's Fourth Amendment rights.

Even though the traffic stop appeared to have been completed, the officer made Rodriguez wait several minutes for the drug-sniffing dog to arrive. In juxtaposition to the case we mentioned in one of our articles, The U.S. Supreme Court held in Rodriguez that the officer had violated the driver's Fourth Amendment rights because the officer had unreasonably extended the traffic stop in order to obtain the probable cause needed to search the driver's vehicle.

Because of this court decision, officers across the nation, including here in California, will need to consider the duration of traffic stops so as not to violate a driver's rights down the road.

Source: The Hill, "Supreme Court: Cops can’t hold suspects to wait for drug-sniffing dog," Julian Hattem, April 21, 2015

No Comments

Leave a comment
Comment Information

Recent Case Results

  • Drunk Driving Offenses

    John was able to get client a reduction of charge of a DUI because of being a nurse it could mean her license.

    He secured a Drunk in Public , and she would attend a 3 month program. Additionally, the dmv hearing was also set aside.

    Both being a win for the client.

    Read More
  • Domestic Violence

    A client was arrested for a Felony Domestic Violence, could have devastated her potential for future employment. John was able to get the case dismissed. Client was thrilled.

    Read More
  • Juvenile Charges

    A juvenile was arrested for 2nd Degree Robbery. After 6 months the case was dismissed.

    A juvenile was arrested for Sexual Battery. After 6 months and 80 hours of Community service, the case was dismissed.

    Read More
  • Drunk Driving Offenses

    A client with a 1st DUI arrest. Fearing she would go to jail; lose her license for a year and lose her job. Got a wet reckless and minimal fines.

    Read More
  • Drug Charges

    A client with 4 Felony charges on a Transportation Charge, a Attempt to Sell, Possession of Marijuana, (50 pounds), Conspiracy Charge all where reduced to 1 Misdemeanor. No Jail.

    Client was charged with 6 Felony drug possessions. Facing jail time. The results: Client got a deferred entry of judgment and then dismissed.

    Client charged with several felony counts of possession of Marijuana with intent to sell. Client was involved in a medical marijuana grow. Case was reduced and later dismissed.

    Read More
  • Sex Crimes

    A client with alleged 2 Felony Sex charges and he faced jail and sex registration. The case was entirely dismissed.

    Client charged with prostitution; facing jail time and sex offender registration. Result: NO JAIL TIME AND NO SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION Deferred Entry of Judgment.

    Read More
  • Domestic Violence

    Client charged with domestic violence, with great bodily injury. Case reduced to a misdemeanor with time served.

    Read More
Email Us For A Response

Learn How We Can Help

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

Areas We Serve

Dublin Office
6379 Clark Avenue
Suite 250
Dublin, CA 94568

Toll Free: 800-785-9556
Toll Free: 800-743-3896
Phone: 925-400-6635
Fax: 925-463-3661
Dublin Law Office Map

Manteca Office
210 East Center Street
Suite 10
Manteca, CA 95336

Toll Free: 800-785-9556
Toll Free: 800-743-3896
Phone: 209-498-3521
Fax: 925-463-3661
Manteca Law Office Map

Back To Top