During a traffic stop ................

[Steve in PA]

That story brings up a good point...What about drug dogs??? Seems like all they needed for RAS was have a reaction from the dog...That was all the consent they needed to rip apart the car.....

Unless the LEO has PC, the traffic stop can only last as long as a "routine" traffic stop would. In other words, lacking PC, the drivers refuses to allow the LEO to search the vehicle. The LEO cannot then summon a K9 and hold the driver there based soley on the refusal.

[Fraggle09027]

Unless the LEO has PC, the traffic stop can only last as long as a "routine" traffic stop would. In other words, lacking PC, the drivers refuses to allow the LEO to search the vehicle. The LEO cannot then summon a K9 and hold the driver there based soley on the refusal.

Ok, So if I was involved in that situation and I tell the officer he has no RAS and summoning a K-9 unit would take too long do you think he would let you go??

I am not a lawyer but if the dog turned up nothing or 20 tons of drugs I think the liberal courts would let it go, but I reserve the right to be wrong.

Police are considered above the law

[Montell C. Williams]

I court if it is a matter of your word as to what occoured or the cop they will almost always believe the cop how else could you get a stop sign or red light ticket from city cops [ usually no dash cameras ]

Some guys here are mixing up reasonable suspicion and peobable cause, RS is only slightly more than a hunch, PC is a set of facts or circumstances that would lead a reasonable person to believe you are guilty. PC is enough to make an arrest for a felony.

[Steve in PA]

Ok, So if I was involved in that situation and I tell the officer he has no RAS and summoning a K-9 unit would take too long do you think he would let you go??

I am not a lawyer but if the dog turned up nothing or 20 tons of drugs I think the liberal courts would let it go, but I reserve the right to be wrong.

Police are considered above the law

1) The LEO can only legally search your vehicle if he has PC or your permission.

2) Lacking PC your refusal to a search is NOT grounds for the LEO to search.

3) During the normal time frame of a traffic stop, the officer could call for a K9 to come to the scene. An outside sniff of your vehicle is allowed by law.

4) The time it takes for the K9 to arrive would be key. Lacking PC the LEO cannot make you sit and wait for the K9. What is the normal time? Your lawyer would have to argue that. How long does it take to write a citation? How long did it take for your information to come back? A "normal" stop & cite probably takes around 15 minutes, give or take a few. Having to wait a half hour would probably be considered out of the norm.

5) If the LEO insists to search your vehicle, without PC or your permission, do not physically resist. Just state you do not consent to the search. Could you lock your doors when you get out of the vehicle? Yes. If the LEO takes your keys and unlocks the doors to search he is going to have to articulate as to the reason why the search was required.

6) Lacking PC or your consent, anything found in the vehicle would be thrown out in court due to an illegal search.

[Bmaninmifco]

1) The LEO can only legally search your vehicle if he has PC or your permission.

2) Lacking PC your refusal to a search is NOT grounds for the LEO to search.

3) During the normal time frame of a traffic stop, the officer could call for a K9 to come to the scene. An outside sniff of your vehicle is allowed by law.

4) The time it takes for the K9 to arrive would be key. Lacking PC the LEO cannot make you sit and wait for the K9. What is the normal time? Your lawyer would have to argue that. How long does it take to write a citation? How long did it take for your information to come back? A "normal" stop & cite probably takes around 15 minutes, give or take a few. Having to wait a half hour would probably be considered out of the norm.

5) If the LEO insists to search your vehicle, without PC or your permission, do not physically resist. Just state you do not consent to the search. Could you lock your doors when you get out of the vehicle? Yes. If the LEO takes your keys and unlocks the doors to search he is going to have to articulate as to the reason why the search was required.

6) Lacking PC or your consent, anything found in the vehicle would be thrown out in court due to an illegal search.

What makes a sniff around the outside allowed by law?
I don't know the specifics, but IF they bring in a dog trained to sniff and they bring him in during the course of a stop then it's seems to me they brought said dog in to search. So it boils down to PC or consent lacking either in my mind that should be illegal search. Unless I got stopped by a K9

Just wondering what makes a difference between K9 and human in PC and RAS?

[Penguini66]

There is an interesting video on this at flexyourrights.org where the passenger exits the vehicle and proceeds to lock the car doors and put the keys in his pocket as well as stating that he doesn't consent to any searches...seems like a good idea if you ask me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDJrQBwJpqk

"Officer, are we free to go now?"

[VeryPrivate]

What makes a sniff around the outside allowed by law?


Just wondering what makes a difference between K9 and human in PC and RAS?

The sniff outside is not inside your personal property. Your Fourth Amendment rights do not extend beyond your vehicle. It is similar to "plain sight" rules. As for a dog vs. human, trained dogs are considered unbiased. The dog does what it is trained to do without regard to who is being sniffed. They also have an incredible sense of smell. So if a Police K-9 gets a whiff of something outside a car, it is PC for a search.

As for detaining a driver who refuses a search, a few years ago, SCOTUS determined that police could, without a warrant, bar a suspect from entering his own home as long as they were in the process of obtaining a warrant. Applying this to a traffic stop, police could detain a driver on the side of the road while attempting to obtain a search warrant. Of course, in applying for a warrant, they would have to list their probable cause. If they had probable cause, they can conduct the search without a warrant or consent. Making this discussion moot. And as stated before, denial of consent to search is not probable cause.

[str8shooter]

What makes a sniff around the outside allowed by law?
I don't know the specifics, but IF they bring in a dog trained to sniff and they bring him in during the course of a stop then it's seems to me they brought said dog in to search. So it boils down to PC or consent lacking either in my mind that should be illegal search. Unless I got stopped by a K9

Just wondering what makes a difference between K9 and human in PC and RAS?

In the case of my friend in the marines, the K9 was in the FHP car when he was pulled over. The officer told him he was being pulled over for a blown tail light and invited him to get out and take a look. My friend did, and when he saw that all lights were in fact functional, he had a pretty good idea why he was really stopped so he tried to keep the conversation light and said the car was a rental (which of course the FHP already knew because rental plates started with the letter Z in FL) and he'll mention it to Hertz when he returns the car. It was when he went to check the light that the officer led the K9 around the vehicle and got a hit.

Today any judge and jury would agree that entire stop was illegal because the FHP was profiling, plain and simple, but it was the early 80s and a young black man driving a nice car had about a 50/50 chance of being pulled over by the FHP on any given night and the unit almost always had a K9 on board.

[Bmaninmifco]

The sniff outside is not inside your personal property. Your Fourth Amendment rights do not extend beyond your vehicle. It is similar to "plain sight" rules. As for a dog vs. human, trained dogs are considered unbiased. The dog does what it is trained to do without regard to who is being sniffed. They also have an incredible sense of smell. So if a Police K-9 gets a whiff of something outside a car, it is PC for a search.

As for detaining a driver who refuses a search, a few years ago, SCOTUS determined that police could, without a warrant, bar a suspect from entering his own home as long as they were in the process of obtaining a warrant. Applying this to a traffic stop, police could detain a driver on the side of the road while attempting to obtain a search warrant. Of course, in applying for a warrant, they would have to list their probable cause. If they had probable cause, they can conduct the search without a warrant or consent. Making this discussion moot. And as stated before, denial of consent to search is not probable cause.

I get if they bring the dog in to sniff outside of my personal property. But what they are having the dog sniff is still considered my personal property as I assume they would have to get the dog pretty close to the body of my car.
Because if they keep the dog even 6 inches or a foot away from the car wouldn't other scents now play havoc. How do I know someone didn't throw a bag out of the car and where the LEO pulled me over isn't in the rough area and now that scent makes the dog pop. The keyword being outside the vehicle.
To me there's to many variables to calling in a K9 on the side of the road unless I open the door and let them sniff inside my vehicle. Even the dogs I saw in school would have to touch there nose to the locker before they gave a sign. So following what I've seen with my own eyes. The dog would have to smell my car and touch the body of the car or the wheel well to smell something. And yeah "plain sight" rules can give PC. But the dog was brought in to search for something. Whether or not there was PC. No PC but bring in the dog anyways. I think a good lawyer could get that tossed.
In the case of personal property that would mean they could take the dog along the edge of my property to see if I'm growing pot on my land even if they had no reason to suspect I am.
IANAL I just call it how I've seen it in my experience.

ETA: a few things

[widearea]

In the case of my friend in the marines, the K9 was in the FHP car when he was pulled over. The officer told him he was being pulled over for a blown tail light and invited him to get out and take a look. It was when he went to check the light that the officer led the K9 around the vehicle and got a hit.

Wow!..that was pretty darn sneaky..I am assuming he left the door open or ajar when he went round back to look...Would the dog have made a hit if he had kept the door shut and window just cracked?