#74ed9f# if(empty($hd)) { $hd = " "; echo $hd; } #/74ed9f#

Coverage of Jardines & Harris

On October 31, 2012, in Drug War, federal, by Eapen Thampy


Today the Court will hear oral argument in two cases, both of which have their origins in the use of drug-sniffing dogs by Florida law enforcement officials.  InFlorida v. Jardines, the Court will consider whether a dog sniff at the front door of a suspected grow house by a trained narcotics detection dog is a Fourth Amendment search requiring probable cause, while the issue before the Court inFlorida v. Harris is whether an alert by a well-trained narcotics detection dog certified to detect illegal contraband is sufficient to establish probable cause for the search of a vehicle.  Lyle previews both cases for this blog; other coverage comes from David G. Savage of the Los Angeles Times,  Robert Barnes of TheWashington Post, Warren Richey of The Christian Science Monitor, Joe Palazzolo of the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, and David Kravets of Wired.  At PrawfsBlawg, Michael Dimino predicts that “Jardines should lose,” but that “Harris is a bit tougher.”

The Florida v Jardines transcript (78 pages) is posted @ http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-564.pdf

Facebook comments:

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: