byron
.308 Win
Drug-sniffing dog put his paws on a man’s car. Idaho Supreme Court says he trespassed
The justices said the actions from the dog, Nero, constituted an unlawful search that violates the Fourth Amendment.
Drug-sniffing dog put his paws on a man’s car. Idaho Supreme Court says he trespassed
- Thread starter byron
- Start date
While Dorff explained to the first officer that he didn’t have a valid driver’s license or proof of insurance in the vehicle
That's enough to get the vehicle towed. Is it enough to search? I understand this isn't the topic here but if they can search based off no license then the dog shouldn't be needed as a reason to search.
If they're going to say that the dog can't rest his paws on their vehicle then an officer is not allowed to break the plane of your window with any part of his body during a traffic stop. This could open up past cases where an officer leaned in and saw something illegal.
That's enough to get the vehicle towed. Is it enough to search? I understand this isn't the topic here but if they can search based off no license then the dog shouldn't be needed as a reason to search.
If they're going to say that the dog can't rest his paws on their vehicle then an officer is not allowed to break the plane of your window with any part of his body during a traffic stop. This could open up past cases where an officer leaned in and saw something illegal.
ManualF150
.308 Win
Same goes for when the officer touches the back of your car. That is now trespassing according to the eyes of the Idaho court.
This will get interesting.
This will get interesting.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
So how much is the dog going to have to come up with to settle?
byron
.308 Win
this is the part that got them.
They said the drug-sniffing dog “intermeddled” with Dorff’s personal effects by jumping up on the car.
“Intermeddling is the difference between someone who brushes up against your purse while walking by and someone who, without privilege or consent, rests their hand on your purse or puts their fingers into your purse before your eyes or behind your back,” Brody wrote.
According to the majority opinion, it doesn’t matter that the unlawful search included the exterior of Dorff’s property or was performed by a drug-sniffing dog.
“There is no asterisk to the Fourth Amendment excusing the unconstitutional acts of law enforcement when they are accomplished by means of a trained dog,” Brody wrote.
They said the drug-sniffing dog “intermeddled” with Dorff’s personal effects by jumping up on the car.
“Intermeddling is the difference between someone who brushes up against your purse while walking by and someone who, without privilege or consent, rests their hand on your purse or puts their fingers into your purse before your eyes or behind your back,” Brody wrote.
According to the majority opinion, it doesn’t matter that the unlawful search included the exterior of Dorff’s property or was performed by a drug-sniffing dog.
“There is no asterisk to the Fourth Amendment excusing the unconstitutional acts of law enforcement when they are accomplished by means of a trained dog,” Brody wrote.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
just a dog training vid .. lol
OwnTheRide
.44 mag
A dog jumping against or standing on a vehicle can easily cause thousands in damage. Just one scratched panel is $1000 in paint work, unless you can do it yourself (most can't).
Unless police departments are going to accept the liability for this, then dogs need to keep their paws to themselves.
(Yes, I realize that is not the actual issue discussed in the article, but it's certainly related).
Unless police departments are going to accept the liability for this, then dogs need to keep their paws to themselves.
(Yes, I realize that is not the actual issue discussed in the article, but it's certainly related).