assisted Algonquin PD in a search for drugs during a traffic stop in Algonquin Monday.What's the problem here?
Is it legal to use a drug dog to search the interior of a vehicle or can the dog only be walked around the outside of the vehicle?
If the dog alerts, do officers then have to get consent of the vehicle's driver or owner before searching the interior? Or, absent permission, must they get a warrant before searching?
According to the article, Algonquin PD Officer Steve Stachura thought he smelled marijuana, so he called for Keiser. No drugs were found, although the officer reported the driver was stuffing something into his mouth while trying to jump out the window.
Check out the full article and this photo on The First Electric Newspaper (http://www.firstelectricnewspaper.com/).
(Photo used with permission from FirstElectricNewspaper.)
10 comments:
I've never been stopped but the way I would respond to a traffic stop is to roll my window down 3/4th inch to stick out my license and insurance card. If asked to step out of the vehicle I would roll up the window, step out and locks the door behind me. If asked if they could look in the vehicle the answer would be NO [search warrant time]. I have nothing to hide but will give them no permissions. They must abide by the book just like you do when driving your vehicle.
timothy, thanks for your comment. That's an excellent response.
I just hope you don't find yourself face-down in the roadway, with a boot on your neck and a pistol in your face.
I too will refuse permission to search. What is in my car is none of anyone's business but my own.
If they say, "You're going to jail if you don't let us search your car," I guess I'll get a ride to jail.
Really Gus? and u want to be sheriff. You neglected to state that the officer smelled cannabis and the subject was arrested for driving under the influence.
As far as the canine search goes maybe you should study case law.
Robert, why don't you tell us what case law is about searching the interior of a vehicle without permission (or maybe they had permission)? If they didn't (and in writing), just what is the law?
Would the odor/aroma of a mouthful of cannabis be detectable?
The article did not say of what he was allegedly under the influence. Drug? Alcohol?
Maybe I'll just follow this case and see how it turns out...
Plain and simple Gus. It was lawful. I do not feel like educating you about case law. I just ask one simple question. If blogging about a topic whatever it may be, research before you write.
Thanks for your time.
It's called probable cause. Plain and simple.
You and I both know that, once the driver is out of the car, you can't search the car. Who are you kidding?
Are you the reason for lawsuits against police departments?
You guys are supposed to know the laws and OBEY them yourselves.
Oh Gussy-if the K9 alerts on the outside of the vehicle the police have probable cause to enter the vehicle and search! Wow you are one big dummy aren't ya? If you don't agree with me in this statement read some case law and then maybe check out US customs!
If I ever again get pulled over, there's always plenty of probable cause as I usually have spilled beer all over my shirt and open bottles in my rust-bucket. The only thing that gets me off is if the deputy wants to share in my inventory... like they've done in the past! DOH!
Thanks for your comment, Frank.
If you read the article on www.FirstElectricNewspaper.com, you'll see that the dog "came up empty" on the vehicle search.
So, if the dog did not alert on the outside of the vehicle, why was it given access to the interior?
And, if the cop smelled marijuana (article didn't saw smell of "burned marijuana"), he didn't really need the dog, did he?
Post a Comment