|
Use of Detection Dogs at Roadblocks
1. U.S. v. Morales-Zamora, 914 F.2d 200 (10th Cir. 1990).Vehicle
sniffed while stopped at driver's license/registration check road block.
Dog did not "and did not invade [defendants] homes or bodily integrity"
and took place in public area while vehicles lawfully detained. Sniff
caused no delay beyond what driver's license/registration check required.
Pretext issue noted, not decided. Brief roadblock detention upheld in
absence of focused suspicion. Court held individualized reasonable suspicion
of drug-related criminal activity is not required when dog sniff is
employed during lawful seizure of vehicle. IMPORTANT: Interpreted
Place as not requiring reasonable suspicion: "The drug-related
nature of the officer's reasonable suspicion was simply not a factor
in the Court's determination that a canine sniff was not a search".
2. U.S. v. Dovali-Avila, 895 F.2d 206 (5th Cir. 1990). Border
patrol permanent check point; "The mere alerting of a dog, or,
to an even lesser extent, the mere walking of a dog around a particular
vehicle, does not, in and of itself, constitute a search," citing
Place. Defendant seated in vehicle at time.
3. U.S. v. Corral, 823 F.2d 1389 (10th Cir. 1987). Police set
up a road block to check vehicle registrations, driver's licenses and
proof of insurance. When a Ryder truck with two men inside stopped,
the officer smelled marijuana. Upon further inquiry, the two gave conflicting
stories. One admitted prior problems with the law. Officers obtained
written consent to search which was finally done back at police station.
Drug dog hit on boxes.
Held: The roadblock was constitutional. It was set up for a lawful
purpose and with the knowledge and consent of the officers' supervisor.
It did not involve a single, random or selective stop at the officer's
discretion. The initial detention was acceptable under Terry. The search
was consensual, but even if there hadn't been consent, there was probable
cause to search for drugs in view of all the circumstances.
4. U.S. v. Hernandez, 976 F.2d 929 (5th Cir. 1992). Dog sniff
of car exterior at Border stop is not a search.
Note: Since reasonable
suspicion of contraband is often present at or after a vehicle stop,
the courts avoid deciding whether reasonable suspicion is necessary
for dogs to sniff the vehicle. The issue only arises when vehicle is
stopped and sniffed in absence of reasonable suspicion to believe contraband
present. |
