 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Menu Modules |
 |
|
|
Search |
|
|
|
|
Broader search powers granted police during traffic stops |
|
 WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court gave police broader search powers Monday
during traffic stops, ruling that drug-sniffing dogs can be used to check
out motorists even if officers have no reason to suspect they may be
carrying narcotics.
(Abilene Reporter News)
Broader search powers granted police during traffic stops
By Hope Yen / Associated Press
January 25, 2005
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court gave police broader search powers Monday
during traffic stops, ruling that drug-sniffing dogs can be used to check
out motorists even if officers have no reason to suspect they may be
carrying narcotics.
In a 6-2 decision, the court sided with Illinois police who stopped Roy
Caballes in 1998 along Interstate 80 for driving 6 miles over the speed
limit. Although Caballes lawfully produced his driver's license, troopers
brought over a drug dog after Caballes seemed nervous.
Caballes argued the Fourth Amendment protects motorists from searches such
as dog sniffing, but Justice John Paul Stevens disagreed, reasoning that the
privacy intrusion was minimal.
'The dog sniff was performed on the exterior of respondent's car while he
was lawfully seized for a traffic violation. Any intrusion on respondent's
privacy expectations does not rise to the level of a constitutionally
cognizable infringement,' Stevens wrote.
In a dissent, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg bemoaned what she called the
broadening of police search powers, saying the use of drug dogs will make
routine traffic stops more 'adversarial.' She was joined in her dissent in
part by Justice David H. Souter.
'Injecting such animal into a routine traffic stop changes the character of
the encounter between the police and the motorist. The stop becomes broader,
more adversarial and (in at least some cases) longer,' she wrote.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist did not participate in consideration of
the case.
The case is another in a line of Supreme Court cases involving the
Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches or seizures.
But civil liberties advocates have argued that allowing greater police
powers in this case would be more troubling. That's because police often use
traffic stops as a pretext to question motorists about suspected illegal
activity for which they have no proof.
In Caballes' case, he was pulled over for driving 71 mph on a stretch of
Interstate 80 with a 65 mph limit. The state trooper noticed air freshener
in the car and asked for permission to search Caballes' trunk. Caballes
refused, but officers searched it later anyway after the dog indicated there
were drugs in the trunk.
The troopers subsequently found $250,000 worth of marijuana, a find that
Caballes argued was unjustified because they had no reason to suspect he had
drugs.
His conviction was later thrown out by the Illinois Supreme Court, a ruling
that the U.S. Supreme Court reversed.
Of local note ...
A Colorado City attorney and outspoken critic of vehicle drug searches
disagreed with a U.S. Supreme Court that allows police to use drug-sniffing
dogs during traffic stops.
'I am concerned about using drug dogs to invade travelers' privacy without
some good reason or at least reasonable suspicion,' said Pat Barber, leader
of the 'Just Say No to Searches' campaign, which encourages motorists to
exercise their rights to decline requests for vehicle searches without just
cause.
'Drug dogs 'hits' are suspect anyway - you can't cross-examine them about
how they reached their conclusions. They make mistakes. They hit on
yesterday's pizza smell, or where another dog has marked a tire. Even worse,
how do we know that the dog's handler didn't teach the dog to 'hit' upon
some simple command?
'Our founders wisely distrusted governmental power,' Barber continued.
'That is why we have constitutional rights. I hope to live long enough to
see our courts stop giving in to the government's insatiable desire for
more.'
|
|
Posted on Monday, November 29 @ 23:00:00 CST by BoXeR |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Related Links |
|
|
|
Article Rating |
|
Average Score: 4.83
Votes: 6
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Broader search powers granted police during traffic stops" | Login/Create an Account | 0 Comments |
| No Comments Allowed for Anonymous Users. |
| The comments are owned by the poster. Just Say No to Searches is not responsible for their content. |
|
|
|
|
|
:: Site Design by www.geekonaleash.net ::
[ Page load time: 0.2701s | Server Uptime: , | Hits: 160,584 | Since: January 2010 ]
| |
| | |
