NCJ Number
188661
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 70 Issue: 4 Dated: April 2001 Pages: 25-32
Date Published
April 2001
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This article examines United States Supreme Court decisions and other judicial decisions regarding when a police officer’s use of a dog to sniff the exterior of an item, a location, or a person for contraband is a search under the Fourth Amendment.
Abstract
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 1983 decision in United States v. Place determined that a dog sniff of lawfully detained luggage in a public place did not represent a search. The Court’s recent decision in City of Indianapolis v. Edmond appears to extend this principle to a dog sniff of the exterior of a vehicle to which police have legitimate access. Judicial decisions have focused on luggage, packages, warehouses or garages, cars, buses, trains, motel rooms, and apartments and homes. Lower court decisions indicate that a dog sniff of a person is generally considered a search. However, police officers should consult with their legal advisors before using a dog to sniff items, locations, or persons for the presence of contraband. They need to do so due to differences of opinions among courts about other dog sniffs and to the possibility that State courts may determine that dog sniffs are searches under their own State constitutions. Photographs and notes