N.D.Ala.: By the time the drug dog entered the car, there already was PC

The drug dog entered the car on the second attempt. But defendant left the door open, and the smell of marijuana was evident. The officer held the dog back in case there was something hazardous in the car. Still, not enough because there already was probable cause before the dog sniff. United States v. Green, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41124 (N.D. Ala. Feb. 12, 2024).

The officer’s testimony is credited: “As a threshold matter, the Court finds that Agent Santiago-Martínez’ demeanor during the hearing was measured and appropriate under the circumstances and he did not appear to be defensive in any way. Indeed, his in-court testimony was sufficiently detailed such that it appeared as though, at times, he was reliving the events in his head as he was testifying to them on the stand.” None of the discrepancies in the warrant application are material to the probable cause finding, so the Franks challenge fails. United States v. Miranda-Rodríguez, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41393 (D.P.R. Mar. 1, 2024).*

Probable cause was shown for the warrant for this hotel room, and nexus was shown. Even if it wasn’t, the good faith exception applies here. United States v. Cooper, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41449 (D. Del. Mar. 7, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Dog sniff, Franks doctrine, Good faith exception, Trespass. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.