CA11: 55% reliability of drug dog PC

55% reliability of trained drug dog was enough for probable cause under Gates‘s “fair probability” standard. United States v. Anderson, 367 Fed. Appx. 30 (11th Cir. 2010) (unpublished):

There was extensive evidence concerning Aron’s certification and training with Deputy Gazdick. In addition to this evidence, the government also provided proof of Aron’s reliability by offering his field records into evidence. Even assuming Anderson’s view of the statistics, Aron had a 55% accuracy rate in finding measurable amounts of drugs. “Absolute certainty is not required by the Fourth Amendment.” … Probable cause requires “a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found.” Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 238, 103 S. Ct. 2317, 2332, 76 L. Ed. 2d 527 (1983) (emphasis added). Here, the district court did not err in determining that the narcotics detection dog’s alert was reliable and gave rise to probable cause to search Anderson’s vehicle.

Altered 2004 Mercury Marquis to look like Ford Crown Victoria with recently replaced windshield was a strong indication of the use of a hidden compartment in the firewall that the Mercury has and Ford doesn’t. The windshield alone was reasonable suspicion, but the altered emblems was probable cause, in the officer’s experience. United States v. Banuelos-Romero, 597 F.3d 763 (5th Cir. 2010).*

Officers [clearly] had reasonable suspicion for a patdown of defendant from his entering a building after being told not to, wearing “baggy gang-related clothes capable of concealing a weapon,” and nervousness on confronting the police. United States v. Brown, 366 Fed. Appx. 784 (9th Cir. 2010) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.