PDA

View Full Version : FL - State seeking the "right" to bring drug dogs to your door for warrantless searches.




Anti Federalist
12-29-2011, 01:28 PM
OK, I'll cut through ten tons of legalese and lawyer's mumbo jumbo.

In 2005 in the llinois v. Caballes SCROTUS decision, the Supreme Court found that a drug sniffing dog being walked around your car did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

The state of Florida is seeking to use this ruling to now allow cops to sniff around your home with drug dogs, without a warrant.




A Sniff Too Far

http://blog.simplejustice.us/2011/12/29/a-sniff-too-far.aspx?ref=rss

Over at Volokh Conspiracy, Orin Kerr raises an interesting question:

What limits, if any, does the Fourth Amendment place on the use of a trained drug-sniffing dog to approach the front door of a home? The police might do this to see if the dog will alert for the presence of narcotics in the home, which might then be used to help show probable cause and obtain a warrant to search it. Under Illinois v. Caballes, the use of the dog around a car is not a “search” and therefore outside the Fourth Amendment. The question is, does the Caballes rule apply when the dog is brought to the front door of a home rather than a car? A divided Florida Supreme Court ruled in Jardines v. State that Caballes does not apply and that probable cause is required to bring the dog up to the home for a sniff.

Florida is seeking cert, so this may come before the Supremes. While most of us would hope that if the Supreme Court grabs hold of this case, it would use it to backdoor out of Caballes on the basis of dog sniffs being unworthy of constituting probable cause.

Between the inherent unreliability, the ease of manipulation by handlers and the fact that no one can cross the dog, the myth of the dog sniff has long been a gaping hole in any rational view of searches and seizures. But no one really expects that to happen, as doggies are cuter than defendants and the dog sniff myth is too deeply embedded in our jurisprudence to acknowledge that its utter nonsense.

Even though Orin argues in favor of a Fourth Amendment approach called An Equilibrium-Adjustment, essentially the Court just making stuff up and trying to wrap it in some pseudo-doctrinal ribbon so that we'll believe there's an actual rule to justify it, let's assume that the Supreme Court might take an approach that is nominally grounded in reason, perhaps a bit of precedent thrown in for good measure. What then?

Orin offers a recap of the morass of search and seizure rules that defy logic (and thus comprise the basis of his new theory):

There are hundreds of different investigatory practices that the police might use to collect evidence, and there is no single guide for how to classify particular practices as a “technique.” At the same time, the law interpreting the Fourth Amendment has to end up classifying each use of each practice somehow. This creates lots of line-drawing and classification problems that come up in Fourth Amendment law all the time. In my view, the earlier case of a dog sniff around a car was tricky because the use of sense-enhancing devices often raise hard problems: Everyone agrees that use of human senses can’t themselves violate the Fourth Amendment (eyesight, hearing, smelling, etc.), and the Court has held that the use of some sense-enhancing devices is okay (such as flashlights) while the use of other sense-enhancing devices crosses the line and becomes a search (such as the use of thermal imaging devices on a home).


Other than a rule that it is/isn't a search because it's Tuesday, does a dog sniff at the front door constitute a search?

In the comments to the post, what emerges as one of the more rational distinctions is that in most single family homes, the police (with canine) must enter upon the curtilage before reaching the front door. This creates a significant and long-held barrier that doesn't exist in a vehicle stopped on the road, though it doesn't help apartment or condo dwellers much.

However, if one views a police approach to a home as invited, as normal folk who want to ask a harmless, innocuous question of a person within a residence would trot up to the front door, ring the bell and inquire, perhaps the curtilage distinction fails. After all, we know from Justice Alito's opinion in Kentucky v. King that cops are just as entitled to mosey up to your door like your bestest friend, where if they happen to smell marijuana, can pound and threaten knock and ask permission to search. While this happened in an apartment building, Alito's rationale makes nothing of the detail, holding instead that it's no constitutional violation to do what ordinary people do, walk up to a front door and, well, let their presence be known.

If the police can do it without a dog, why would having a pooch at their side change the equation?

Of course, none of this would present an issue if the Court decided to let go of their love of dog sniffs as a proxy for probable cause. As Orin wryly notes:

Putting aside that hearsay is admissible in suppression hearings, is a “woof!” admitted for the truth of the matter asserted?


That's the "woof" that launched a thousand automobile searches. Is it good enough to open a thousand front doors as well?

phill4paul
12-29-2011, 01:42 PM
If people have not awoken to the fact that it has now come down to Us vs.Them then I don't know what else to say. When all manner of peaceful negotiations to retain ones natural rights are exhausted there is only one more course of action.

ronpaulfollower999
12-29-2011, 02:08 PM
LOL LOL LOL LOL

Good luck. ;)

Brian4Liberty
12-29-2011, 02:12 PM
Drug dogs give an "alert" when their handlers tell them to.

In essence, they are giving dogs the power to issue a warrant. Nice. :rolleyes:

tod evans
12-29-2011, 02:18 PM
Yet another erosion of property rights!
It will be interesting how they propose to get the dog onto private property without a warrant.....apartment dwellers beware!
This is getting more nuts by the week!

Pericles
12-29-2011, 02:53 PM
Drug dogs give an "alert" when their handlers tell them to.

In essence, they are giving dogs the power to issue a warrant. Nice. :rolleyes:

There should be some way to have fun with that in court.

jkr
12-29-2011, 03:00 PM
tie alligators to the porch?

Pericles
12-29-2011, 03:02 PM
tie alligators to the porch?

I knew somebody would have a good idea.

puppetmaster
12-29-2011, 03:06 PM
They would have to get a warrant to get to my house.....can't come to my door unless you are trespassing. now this does suck for apartment dwellers

phill4paul
12-29-2011, 03:39 PM
tie alligators to the porch?

LOL. :cool:

TomtheTinker
12-29-2011, 04:08 PM
they wont stop until the people stand up.

Lucille
12-29-2011, 04:16 PM
My God, the government is inundated with filthy police state fascists from top to bottom.

flightlesskiwi
12-29-2011, 04:26 PM
they wont stop until the people stand up.

and when that happens...

"send in the hounds!"

but, seriously. the rate at which we are falling is astounding.

i'm going to take the pessimistic view and not hold my breath. many people will not stand up for themselves let alone for someone they knoweth not-- especially if the person doesn't fall into the same flock.

DamianTV
12-29-2011, 05:57 PM
I fear we are only one step away from total surveillance inside our homes. Pretty soon, cops will require us to have cameras (that we will have to afford the costs for) inside our homes to monitor for anything illegal. They do a pretty damn good job on most non technical people by monitoring them with cell phones and anything on the computer, not to mention that everything you watch on TV someone has recorded, every game you play, it wont be long until we are under 100% complete and total full time surveillance if we allow this to continue.

Whos definition of an Honest Justice System is this?

flightlesskiwi
12-29-2011, 06:06 PM
I fear we are only one step away from total surveillance inside our homes. Pretty soon, cops will require us to have cameras (that we will have to afford the costs for) inside our homes to monitor for anything illegal. They do a pretty damn good job on most non technical people by monitoring them with cell phones and anything on the computer, not to mention that everything you watch on TV someone has recorded, every game you play, it wont be long until we are under 100% complete and total full time surveillance if we allow this to continue.

Whos definition of an Honest Justice System is this?

it's The System's definition.

Anti Federalist
12-29-2011, 06:08 PM
I fear we are only one step away from total surveillance inside our homes. Pretty soon, cops will require us to have cameras (that we will have to afford the costs for) inside our homes to monitor for anything illegal. They do a pretty damn good job on most non technical people by monitoring them with cell phones and anything on the computer, not to mention that everything you watch on TV someone has recorded, every game you play, it wont be long until we are under 100% complete and total full time surveillance if we allow this to continue.

Whos definition of an Honest Justice System is this?

Who's definition of a "free society" is this?

donnay
12-29-2011, 09:36 PM
People in Florida ought to start buying big containers of Cheyenne pepper and sprinkle it around their front doors--that ought to throw the dogs for a loop. :D

coastie
12-29-2011, 10:07 PM
They would have to get a warrant to get to my house.....can't come to my door unless you are trespassing. now this does suck for apartment dwellers


This...and my driveway is by no means that big, hell, my entire lot is a little over 1/3 acre with the 1750 sqft house on it....


Guess I'll go ahead and put that chain link fence up around the front of the house now...then they would be trespassing without question.

Wonder how long its gonna take before a homeowner shoots these thugs walking around their house in the middle of the night? I'm gonna look further into this. My state rep literally lives across the street from my neighborhood, see and wave to him almost every day, so it wouldn't be too odd that I approach him for a chat on this issue.

MikeStanart
12-29-2011, 10:08 PM
The Technology is there. Need this on a larger scale. Maybe motion activated?

http://www.amazon.com/DAZER-II-Ultrasonic-Dog-Deterrent/dp/B000E7KVQ2

coastie
12-29-2011, 10:13 PM
Oh...and what if my dog is in heat??? i don't care how well trained a dog is, ALL of them react to that, male or female.

flightlesskiwi
12-29-2011, 10:20 PM
Oh...and what if my dog is in heat??? i don't care how well trained a dog is, ALL of them react to that, male or female.

irresponsible mundane pet owner. git your dog spayed!!!

reported!!

coastie
12-29-2011, 10:27 PM
From the case in Question:

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Miami-Dade Police Department received a Crime Stoppers tip that Jardines was growing marijuana in his house. About a month later, on December 6, 2006, at 7:00 a.m., Detective Pedraja, along with a drug task force that included several agents of the United States Drug Enforcement Agency, conducted surveillance at Jardines’ house. After observing no activity at the house, canine officer Detective Bartlet, with his leashed narcotics dog, Franky, and Detective Pedraja, in that order, using the sidewalk, went to the front porch of the
house. Franky alerted at the front door. At that point, the canine officer and the dog left. Detective Pedraja then knocked on the front
door to obtain consent to search. There was no response. He then personally smelled the odor of marijuana. Detective Pedraja also noticed the air conditioning running constantly for fifteen minutes, which, in his experience, is a sign of a grow house. While the task force remained behind in public areas to secure the scene, Detective Pedraja went to obtain a search warrant.

:eek:Besides the trespassing they did-wtf is up with this statement??? An A/C running for more than 15 minutes is unusual, in FLORIDA!?!?!? Are you f*cking kidding me? This would automatically make my house "suspicious"-mine's on almost all day, especially in the summertime, and even in December-hell, its on right now.:confused: In Miami in December it is by no means anywhere near 'cold", and regularly gets high enough in temp/HUMIDITY that causes A/C's to kick on all the damn time!!!!

John of Des Moines
12-29-2011, 10:29 PM
Just sprinkle hot pepper powder around your front door and those of your neighbor every week or so. End of problem.

coastie
12-29-2011, 10:29 PM
She is fixed,lol, was just sayin'.

coastie
12-29-2011, 10:30 PM
Just sprinkle hot pepper powder around your front door and those of your neighbor every week or so. End of problem.

No-it degrades much faster than that, in other words it would be expensive as hell, and no deterrent whatsoever to the asshole handler who will just lie and say the dog hit just to get inside...21 years of living in Florida has taught me that they hit every time they bring them out...how convenient. How "surprising" they have always been wrong when I've been pulled.:rolleyes:

Anti Federalist
12-29-2011, 10:40 PM
Just sprinkle hot pepper powder around your front door and those of your neighbor every week or so. End of problem.

Where you will be SWAT raided, beat, tased and arrested for "assaulting an officer"

AFPVet
12-29-2011, 10:49 PM
Wow is all I have to say.

coastie
12-29-2011, 11:01 PM
What if...?

My dog has the same toy you give yours after "finding" contraband?

...the same treats you give them?

...my dog is in heat?

...someone smoked or handled marijuana before coming to my home, but not in my home?

...your dog "hits" on something familiar to them? After all, some of these are your family dogs at home...my kid may have the same blanket, clothes, toys, ad infinitum.

...You're dog is wrong, and you awaken a law abiding, armed family with a no-knock raid potentially resulting in not only the unnecessary injury/deaths of innocents-but in the unnecessary injuries/deaths to your officers as well?

Current data compiled by the National Safety Council show that you are 8 times more likely to die in an encounter with a police officer than you are in an attack by a fanatical Muslim boogey man with a suitcase nuke.

In what direction will this data swing if police officers are allowed to roam neighborhoods with attack dogs sniffing out every door?


More importantly-what have we become?
1059

1060

coastie
12-29-2011, 11:21 PM
///

flightlesskiwi
12-29-2011, 11:23 PM
http://rising.blackstar.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/page-105-POL01MOOR0234--450x302.jpg

devil21
12-30-2011, 02:29 AM
tie alligators to the porch?

The free market solution is alligator pee in a spray bottle that connects to the garden hose :)

Brian4Liberty
12-30-2011, 02:36 AM
Oh...and what if my dog is in heat??? i don't care how well trained a dog is, ALL of them react to that, male or female.

Mythbusters, right?

Expatriate
12-30-2011, 02:42 AM
I was thinking you could just have your own dog at the door to freak out the police dog, but they'd probably shoot it.

devil21
12-30-2011, 02:42 AM
All drug (and bomb, etc) dog training is making the dog think it's favorite toy is in the place being sniffed. They scent the dog's favorite toy with the smell of whatever the cops are training it to find, then the dog reacts to the smell as if it has found its toy and gets to play now. It's basic manipulation of the dog's senses but the dog can also react to the handler's cues, if the handler wants to get the dog to react a certain way. I don't know about you all but I can make my dog think it is play time without any smell or even a toy involved. Words, tone of voice and body language is enough.

osan
12-30-2011, 09:17 AM
What so many people are missing, largely because they have not been paying attention these several years, is the fundamental shift in the role of police. While never quite legitimate in any event, the initial prima facie role was as peace keeper and not law enforcer. This role began changing during prohibition, took something of a breather thereafter, then resumed in the late 60s and took larger strides in the 70s, steadily ramping up until 9/11 and is now climbing along an apparently asymptotic rise.

What is the difference between being a keeper of the peace and law enforcer? Passive v. active duty. Go back in time and what we had were the stereotypical beat cops doing their thing and largely minding their own business until such time as an actual call to help or witnessing of a crime occurred. With the exception of rat holes like Chicago, rife with the stench of corruption, there was no such things as bands of cops busting down the doors of peaceable citizens. Even in places like Chicago such actions were only taken with warrants issued more or less on probable cause. So even if Ma Jones in Littletown USA was in fact cooking up some bathtub gin, she was safe so long as she did not give herself obviously away or by disrupting the peace. Life went on and people enjoyed something much closer to actual freedom.

Today we have no peace officers, but law enforcement personnel. Their role is fundamentally different and at odds with human freedom in that it is not a passive role, but active. Police no longer stand vigilantly, paying attention for signs of actual wrong doing while respecting the sanctity of the individuals to whom they swore an oath of faithful service and respect (and make no mistake, swearing an oath to uphold the Constitution is precisely that). Today, police actively seek ways to catch anyone engaged in behavior for which arrest may be affected, property confiscated, and hopefully charges made, even if those charges will not stick. This is a radical alteration in mindset, from protector to hunter-killer.

The notion of peace-keeper is sufficiently fraught with problems to render it of eminently questionable moral capacity. That of law enforcement hunter-killer is nothing at all short of being identical with the German gestapo, and this is no exaggeration. When one analyzes the powers and actions of that infamous mob and compares it with what we have today in America, the only real difference is that the cops today are notably more bloodthirsty than were their German forebears. In the 1970s anyone suggesting that police would evolve as they have would have been sent to a padded cell and dosed heavily with Placidyl and Thorazine. Nobody would have accepted this as even remotely possible. Today, it is accepted as perfectly normal.

Oh, for the fright the human specter at times poses.

Question: can sheriffs arrest police who act outside of their Constitutional limits? Are the sheriffs our current best bet in mitigating the police threat? In a war between sheriffs and cops, who is likely to prevail? I am casting about for ideas on how to de-ball and perhaps eventually eliminate all police.

Anti Federalist
12-30-2011, 01:40 PM
Today we have no peace officers, but law enforcement personnel. Their role is fundamentally different and at odds with human freedom in that it is not a passive role, but active. Police no longer stand vigilant, paying attention for signs of actual wrong doing while respecting the sanctity of the individuals to whom they swear an oath of faithful service and respect (and make no mistake, swearing an oath to uphold the Constitution is precisely that). Today, police actively seek ways to catch anyone engaged in behavior for which arrest may be affected, property confiscated, and hopefully charges made, even if those charges will not stick. This is a radical alteration in mindset, from protector to hunter-killer.


That should be burned into the brain of every single America citizen out there.

There it all is, in one paragraph.

+rep

tod evans
12-30-2011, 02:02 PM
I fear we are only one step away from total surveillance inside our homes. Pretty soon, cops will require us to have cameras (that we will have to afford the costs for) inside our homes to monitor for anything illegal.

Look at what is involved with the "kinect" system for the x-box....cameras/microphones and motion sensors all hooked into the internet.
Think this is a fluke?