support@bluetogold.com

or use our live chat

888-579-7796

Customer Service

LEGAL

RESEARCH

Florida v. Harris

Facts

An officer pulled the defendantโ€™s truck over due to an expired license plate. During this encounter, the officer observed that the defendant was โ€œvisibly nervousโ€ in that he could not sit still, was shaking and breathing rapidly. He asked the defendant for permission to search the vehicle, which the defendant declined. The officer retrieved his drug-sniffing dog from his patrol vehicle and walked him around the defendantโ€™s truck. The dog alerted to the presence of controlled substances in the truck. The officer, believing he had probable cause, began a mobile conveyance search of the truck, resulting in his discovery of precursor materials for the manufacturing of controlled substances.

Issue

Whether a trained drug-sniffing dogโ€™s alert can establish probable cause?

Held

Yes. The reliability of a well-trained drug dog is such that a court is entitled to base a finding of probable cause on its alert

Discussion

The defendant asked the Supreme Court to install a greater hurdle for the government
before using evidence created by drug-sniffing dogs. The Court has previously
โ€œrejected rigid rules, bright-line tests, and mechanistic inquiries in favor of a more
flexible, all-things-considered approachโ€โ€ฆin probable cause determinations. In doing
so, the Court held that reviewing courts are entitled to find probable cause exists on
the signal of a certified, trained drug-sniffing dog.

Citation

568 U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 1050 (2013)

Send a message!

Subscribe to Update