USMJ recommends motion to suppress car search based on a dog alert should be granted because the handler prompted the dog and both the handler and dog entered the window and then the car before the dog alert. As to his house, there protective sweep was justified and there was probable cause. United States v. Brown, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1112 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 3, 2025):<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Defendant argues that, while officers were justified in conducting a Terry stop of Defendant for a seatbelt infraction, the free air sniff by Freddy and Deputy Williamson did not provide probable cause to conduct a warrantless search of the Impala’s interior. \u2026 Police may conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle during a Terry stop when the search is incident to a lawful arrest, conducted with valid consent, or based on probable cause to believe the vehicle contains contraband or evidence of a crime and the vehicle is operational. [Gant, Labron, Robinette] As explained below, Freddy’s free air sniff was tainted by constitutional violations and woefully inadequate to establish probable cause, and the exclusionary rule requires suppression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
USMJ recommends motion to suppress car search based on a dog alert should be granted because the handler prompted the dog and both the handler and dog entered the window and then the car before the dog alert. As to … Continue reading