Supreme Court Rules Against Drug-Sniffing Dogs to get Warrants

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.


It wasn’t all same-sex marriage at the United States Supreme Court Tuesday; the justices decided that it takes more than an alerted drug detection dog to get a warrant.

If he sits down, that means there’s drugs. That’s how Roseville Police Officer Gage Lawley’s K-9 communicates with him and, up until Tuesday, if a police dog alerted an officer of drugs on the property of someone’s home, it was grounds for law enforcement to get a warrant.

The U.S. Supreme Court decided with a 5-4 majority that a dog sniffing at your doorstep has gone to far.

“We don’t do that here in Roseville. We use them to search for drugs, only when we have a reason,” said Ofc. Lawley.

A police dog sniffing a suspect house constitutes a ‘search’ under the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution– according to one justice.

In other words, if an officer can’t be on someone’s property get a warrant, neither can a K-9.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

1 Comment

  • georgewbush

    This is good, Stupid Dogs are unreliable and the dogs can be trained to sit down on command to get a fraud warrant.