|
 |
|
|
9/24/2004
A team of Jenner & Block attorneys recently filed an amicus brief for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide whether the police, consistent with the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, may automatically use drug-detection dogs to sniff for drugs during a routine traffic stop.
The brief, written by Partners Barry Sullivan and Jacob I. Corré and Associate Lisa D. Johnson, argues that the state’s use of drug-detection dogs cannot be justified by the investigative needs of a routine traffic stop, and that this kind of deployment impermissibly enlarges the scope of the stop, violating the Fourth Amendment. That amendment bars unreasonable searches and seizures.
“A routine traffic stop cannot be deemed a ‘free pass,’ whereby…the police are automatically empowered to undertake whatever additional, unrelated and intrusive investigation they see fit,” the brief says.
The case, Illinois v. Roy I. Caballes, concerns a 1998 incident in which Mr. Caballes was pulled over by an Illinois State trooper for driving six miles over the speed limit. When a canine officer heard over the police radio that a motorist had been pulled over, he advised a dispatcher that he was on his way to conduct a canine sniff, even though the trooper on the scene had not requested assistance.
When the search dog alerted to the possible presence of drugs in Mr. Caballes’ trunk, he was arrested, charged with drug trafficking and later convicted and sentenced to 12 years in prison. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed, finding a violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The brief also warns that new advances in technology make this a high stakes case for protecting Fourth Amendment rights: “Evolving technology promises almost unlimited possibilities for transforming routine traffic stops into far-reaching, multi-purpose investigations.”
Practice Groups:
Appellate and Supreme Court Practice
Related Document(s):
|
|
Print This Page
