US Supreme Court issues decision in case involving drug-sniffing dogs

Protecting the right of people to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is at the heart of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Minnesota mirrors the protections of the Fourth Amendment in article I, section 10 of the state constitution. State and federal courts frequently must decide if evidence seized by law enforcement officers and used to prove criminal charges violates the Minnesota and federal constitutional protections.

In some of these cases, a police dog trained to detect the scent of drugs is used to establish grounds for the search. While a dog’s sense of smell may provide grounds for a search of a motor vehicle, the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that using drug-sniffing dogs to pick up the scent of drugs inside a home violated the Fourth Amendment.

Do drug-sniffing dogs constitute an unreasonable search?

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a dog trained to detect the scent of drugs is a reliable source to establish probable cause to search a motor vehicle stopped for a traffic violation or at a DUI roadblock. The Minnesota Supreme Court extended the use of dogs to searches of a person’s home or apartment in 2007.

The Minnesota court ruled that a police dog’s signal could be sufficient support for a request for a search warrant to enter and search an apartment. The court held that such use of a drug-sniffing dog did not violate the apartment owner’s Fourth Amendment right to privacy.

This decision appears to be at odds with the most recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, in which it held that police use of a drug-sniffing dog to detect the scent of marijuana from outside a person’s home was an unconstitutional intrusion.

The case before the U.S. Supreme Court involved an individual who was growing marijuana in his private residence. A drug-sniffing dog alerted to the presence of marijuana, which police used as justification to obtain a warrant to search the house. Citing Fourth Amendment prohibitions on unreasonable searches, the high court ruled against the use of drug-sniffing dogs to establish probable cause to enter a home.

Protect your rights

A person accused of committing a crime in which police gathered evidence by a search and seizure should retain the services of a criminal defense attorney. The protections offered by the U.S. and Minnesota constitutions can only help if the accused person challenges the procedures used by the police.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

Digital Evidence in Sex Crime Cases: How Your Online Activity Can Be Used Against You in Minnesota

Prosecutors in Minnesota use digital evidence in sex crime cases to connect suspects to crimes. They analyze the chronological order of online events and statements to show intent, motive, or premeditation. The common types of evidence used in sex crime investigations include direct, actual, and circumstantial evidence.

Can You Be Charged With a DUI If You’re Sleeping in Your Car in Minnesota?

One of the questions DUI lawyers in the state often answer is: Can you be charged with a DUI if you’re sleeping in your car? You can face DUI charges in Minnesota even if you are not actively operating your car. The “physical control” law states that anyone with the capacity to drive a vehicle while intoxicated can get arrested and charged with DUI.

How Prosecutors Use Text Messages in Minnesota Drug Cases

Prosecutors use text messages in Minnesota drug cases to prove circumstantial evidence. Text messages can prove intent or motive to distribute drugs. Knowing how your text messages may be used against you in a drug crime case can help you plan an effective defense strategy. That’s why you should involve a Minnesota drug crime attorney immediately after you get arrested, charged, or discover the police are investigating you for a drug crime. Your lawyer can carefully examine your text messages and determine the best way to counter the prosecution’s case.