IN: Essentially: police may use a drug dog during any traffic stop if they don’t extend it by the sniff

While one officer wrote out a warning for a window tint violation, another asked for consent to search and was refused. While the normal routine of the warning citation was being followed, another officer ran a drug dog around the vehicle. This did not violate either the Fourth Amendment or the state constitution because it didn’t extend the stop. Doctor v. State, 2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 261 (July 26, 2016).

The video of defendant’s driving supports the officer’s reasonable suspicion that he was wandering in his lane and crossed the fog line. State v. Williams, 2016 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 547 (July 26, 2016).* Same, except yellow line. State v. Bell, 2016 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 539 (July 25, 2016).*

This entry was posted in Dog sniff, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.