SHould_A_K-9_Sniff_Be_Considered_Probable_Cause_For_A_Search

SHould A K-9 Sniff Be Considered Probable Cause For A Search A positive Police K-9 alert after a drug sniff of a particular object should not be considered probable cause for a full search to be conducted. The answer to this question has been argued using many different complex methods. Therefore, a few definitions and some past court findings must be presented. Probable cause has been defined by the U.S. Supreme Court as “the belief by a reasonable and prudent officer that a crime has been committed or is about to be committed (some evidence should be presented to articulate this belief),” (United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798). In relation to searches, probable cause is very space specific. For example, let’s say an officer obtained probable cause to search someone’s house for some computers that were stolen. The officer (with a warrant) only has the right to search places where these computers could be stored, not medicine cabinets, drawers, or envelopes. A search is defined just that - a search of someone’s person or property (and for this purpose) without consent. It is also accepted that police canines have been extensively trained in detecting narcotics in hidden and visible compartments and are much more search, police, probable, officer, cause, dog, vehicle, should, court, sniff, alert, very, trunk, right, marijuana, it’s, considered, one, narcotic, government, found, evidence, drug, driver, different, courts, been, because, warrant, trained, therefore, stop, smell, ruled, reason