Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66

Thread: K9 alert for drugs" in car search Question

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691

    K9 alert for drugs" in car search Question

    Hypothetical scenario question for anyone who knows the law regarding vehicle searches and what can be charged.

    Someone is pulled over for speeding in California. Officer says he wants a K9 to sniff the outside of the car after driver declines an officers request to search. K9 "alerts" to drugs, officers search car find ZERO drugs but find improperly secured (locked in case) and loaded handgun in vehicle.

    Question is, when a search is initiated for "drugs" is anything else fair game? If I'm not mistaken, search warrants must specifically state what is being searched for.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Look up "fruits of the poisonous tree". Basically just means if you can legally search an area whatever you find is fair. If the initial search is bad then everything found is bad. That's a very basic summation of it.

    You mentioned warrants, same applies. You need to be detailed in your warrant in what your looking for. For example if your looking for a stolen car then if your looking in a underwear draw and find a gun it would most likely get tossed seeing as how stolen cars don't fit in underwear drawers. (Your honor my client can't fit a camaro in that drawer it was full of drugs!!) (Your honor we were looking for the keys to the stolen car....)

    I'm not familiar with California case lawn or their K9 procedure. I do know each States supreme court have ruled every which way on drug sniffs and new case law comes out a few times a year.

    My point is that if the initial search is good (for drugs) then yes the gun will be good. If that k9 sniff is bad or gets tossed then anything found based on that is tossed.


    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Never take legal advice/instruction from a cop, particularly a pseudonymous cop, they are not bound to the truth.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    I'm still trying to figure out why you remained at the side of the road long enough for the cop to say he wants to have a dog sniff your car.

    Take the ticket from his hand, put on the turn signal, and merge out into traffic.

    If the cop is pulling an "Oh, by the way, would you mind if ...." before he hands you the ticket, tell him yes, you would mind and to give you the ticket. Lather, rinse, repeat in a polite tone of voice until he hands you the ticket. You may then decide whether or not to wish him a happy rest of the day as you depart to go on about your business.

    Don't get out of ther boat. Don't volunteer. And don't hang around when you are free to go.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  5. #5
    Regular Member F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The High Plains of Wyoming
    Posts
    1,030
    Also don't forget K-9 cops have been caught having trained their dogs to "alert" on a command, a slight variation in the search command such as find, find, find, search. Watch for the alert to happen out of your sight so you can't see the signal and far enough away you have trouble hearing the commands; it will not happen in clear line of sight or close enough to hear clearly.

    Remember the 3 rules of road side police searches;

    1} Cops lie
    2} Cops lie
    3} Cops lie

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Never take legal advice/instruction from a cop, particularly a pseudonymous cop, they are not bound to the truth.
    Kaaaa-POW !

  7. #7
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    I'm glad the forum could offer him so many well thought out answers to his question. "If something found during a search for drugs would it be admissible" -paraphrase.

    Insult/warning, just leave don't let them search, drug dogs lie, and kapow.

    Fountain of insightful information there. I hope he was taking notes.


    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  8. #8
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    "I don't do dogs"......
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  9. #9
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,877
    OP, recommend getting a copy of 'you and the police' by boston t party. this author mentions some handlers keep their training bag in their pockets, rub their fingers on it and touch the vehicle and then direct the k9 unit to the spot where the handler touched. voila! the k9 gets a hit and the vehicle and driver is theirs.

    the author also states similar guidance skid offered, take ticket, turn on signals, and pull away.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I'm glad the forum could offer him so many well thought out answers to his question. "If something found during a search for drugs would it be admissible" -paraphrase.

    Insult/warning, just leave don't let them search, drug dogs lie, and kapow.

    Fountain of insightful information there. I hope he was taking notes.


    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    Post #2 (yours, BTW) pretty well covered the question of admissibility.

    All that was left was to address the "Would you mind waiting while ...." part of the inquiry. Well, that and the not-quite-cop-bashing.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  11. #11
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Post #2 (yours, BTW) pretty well covered the question of admissibility.

    All that was left was to address the "Would you mind waiting while ...." part of the inquiry. Well, that and the not-quite-cop-bashing.

    stay safe.
    Not really sure where the "would you mind waiting while...." Came from. Depending on the state there is no question about it. If the officer has RS/PC for a sniff he's going to call the dog BEFORE he gives the citation... Is no needs to "ask" or give the citation so your free to leave. He would just get the dog and have it there shortly and conduct the search.... Also the OP seemed to be asking what happens AFTER the search and something is found.. Not how to "avoid" said search...

    Admissibility is the big question since there's not much you can do to stop said search. If he doesn't release you and just calls the dog your stuck there. If he finds something your getting charged... Only way to fight it is educate yourself on case law and the concept of poisonous tree doctrine.

    Driving away is NOT a good idea. Saying NO on camera or recording is a good idea. As with not answering any questions.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    If he had RAS or PC then why the need for the dog?

    This is a twisted unconstitutional allowance by the courts.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Not really sure where the "would you mind waiting while...." Came from. Depending on the state there is no question about it. If the officer has RS/PC for a sniff he's going to call the dog BEFORE he gives the citation... Is no needs to "ask" or give the citation so your free to leave. He would just get the dog and have it there shortly and conduct the search.... Also the OP seemed to be asking what happens AFTER the search and something is found.. Not how to "avoid" said search...
    Standing up for ones rights with a law enforcement officer can often be viewed by the LEO as "contempt of cop" and therefore must be dealt with. More and more videos are popping up from across the nation of Citizens exercising their RIGHTS at DUI checkpoints, traffic stops, etc. and Govt. Agents abusing those rights as well as manufacturing RAS/PC ("I smell mj").

    You are correct that I am concerned about "After the search". Police will NEVER find drugs in my vehicle, but they would probably find my firearm as I insist on keeping it loaded and accessible as any personal defense tool should be.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff. State View Post
    Standing up for ones rights with a law enforcement officer can often be viewed by the LEO as "contempt of cop" and therefore must be dealt with. More and more videos are popping up from across the nation of Citizens exercising their RIGHTS at DUI checkpoints, traffic stops, etc. and Govt. Agents abusing those rights as well as manufacturing RAS/PC ("I smell mj").

    You are correct that I am concerned about "After the search". Police will NEVER find drugs in my vehicle, but they would probably find my firearm as I insist on keeping it loaded and accessible as any personal defense tool should be.
    Well like i said in my original answer.. Depending in the state if the sniffs are admissible and then they search based on said sniff, whatever they find they can/will charge you with. Only way to fight it is when your at your trial you can bring up said search and file a motion to try and get it tossed. If you get the search tossed then youll have the gun tossed and charges dismissed. Thats a very broad answer to a broad question. The devil is in the details which is why in said case law matters with this stuff.

    Sounds like you carry in a manner that may get you in a pinch if you were stopped and search. That's obviously choice and none of our business. All I can say is it might be easier/better to rectify that then try and beat charges if your caught.

    Either good luck and be safe.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  15. #15
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    If he had RAS or PC then why the need for the dog?
    .
    Still wondering.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  16. #16
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Still wondering.
    Take a deep breath and hold it. We'll get back to you.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  17. #17
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by F350 View Post
    Also don't forget K-9 cops have been caught having trained their dogs to "alert" on a command, a slight variation in the search command such as find, find, find, search. Watch for the alert to happen out of your sight so you can't see the signal and far enough away you have trouble hearing the commands; it will not happen in clear line of sight or close enough to hear clearly.

    Remember the 3 rules of road side police searches;

    1} Cops lie
    2} Cops lie
    3} Cops lie
    Fortuitously, this was in Cracked.com just this morning:
    If you're a product of the American public school system or you just travel a lot, you've probably faced at least one situation featuring a law enforcement official with a drug dog, sniffing around your belongings to see if you're holding. Maybe you've taken a look at the happy pooch sniffing about and remembered that holy **** you have a half eaten Slim Jim in your backpack and braced yourself for the inevitable cavity search.

    But the dog didn't bat an eyelid at the scent of your meat snack. See, dog noses are ******* incredible. If it's drugs they search for, then that's the only thing they'll react to. That's why many districts spend as much as $36,000 per year to have K-9 units sweep their schools. Which is a shame, really, considering that drug dogs are accurate less than half the time.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 07-27-2014 at 09:42 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Fortuitously, this was in Cracked.com just this morning:[ ... ] drug dogs are accurate less than half the time.
    Dog's error rate times handlers error rate, demonstrated Primarily here, makes for a you-betcha sure thing.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Take a deep breath and hold it. We'll get back to you.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

    You don't have PC or RAS and want the dog to generate it for you. What a sham! What a travesty of rights and the oath to the constitution.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    The thing is, dogs admittedly have wonderful, highly sensitive noses; there's no disagreement on that. But they have no cognitive ability to know why they are being asked to alert on a scent other than their bestest-friend-in-the-whole-wide-world is happy when they do.
    They get rewarded when drugs are found but modern training says you only praise, never punish a dog so when they get it wrong there's no negative reinforcement (and we all know That's because of the way pack behavior shapes a dog's psychology; why would you punish someone when they were doing their very best to please their pack leader?

    Not to mention that it is NOT in a department's best interest to maintain success/fail records of a dog when it's alert is being used to induce the idea of its infallibility as to detecting trace amounts of drugs. If an apprehension is not made because no drugs were found, it's written of as "Drugs were there, but they aren't now, the dog simply alerted to the trace amounts that were left. Our position is that a dog never has a 'false alert' as they have no reason to lie."

  21. #21
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    The thing is, dogs admittedly have wonderful, highly sensitive noses; there's no disagreement on that. But they have no cognitive ability to know why they are being asked to alert on a scent other than their bestest-friend-in-the-whole-wide-world is happy when they do.
    They get rewarded when drugs are found but modern training says you only praise, never punish a dog so when they get it wrong there's no negative reinforcement (and we all know That's because of the way pack behavior shapes a dog's psychology; why would you punish someone when they were doing their very best to please their pack leader?

    Not to mention that it is NOT in a department's best interest to maintain success/fail records of a dog when it's alert is being used to induce the idea of its infallibility as to detecting trace amounts of drugs. If an apprehension is not made because no drugs were found, it's written of as "Drugs were there, but they aren't now, the dog simply alerted to the trace amounts that were left. Our position is that a dog never has a 'false alert' as they have no reason to lie."

    Recently saw a video where an officer tapped a window and the dog immediately alerted to the spot he tapped. Then again there is a video where the officer shoves the dog inside the drivers window!
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  22. #22
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff. State View Post
    Hypothetical scenario question for anyone who knows the law regarding vehicle searches and what can be charged.

    Someone is pulled over for speeding in California. Officer says he wants a K9 to sniff the outside of the car after driver declines an officers request to search. K9 "alerts" to drugs, officers search car find ZERO drugs but find improperly secured (locked in case) and loaded handgun in vehicle.

    Question is, when a search is initiated for "drugs" is anything else fair game? If I'm not mistaken, search warrants must specifically state what is being searched for.
    Of the thousnads of traffic stops each day how many have a search of the vehicle as part of the stop? Really don't know. I just know what I see when driving around, one search in a hundred observed stops...maybe.

    If the cop wants to search my vehicle he will search, my protestations be danged. I am not inclined to being roughed up for resisting something.

    Cop: "Mind if I search your vehicle."
    Me: "I do not consent to a search and object to the extra detainment. Am I free to leave?"
    Cop: Hmm...what to do.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Northern Nevada, ,
    Posts
    721
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Still wondering.
    RAS = required for detention

    PC = required for search, arrest, or warrant

    Neither is required for an external plain look/plain smell, dog or not.

    If the dog creates false PC for a search which does not turn up evidence of that PC, but turns up a gun or some other verboten contraband, what do you think will happen? "Oh golly, my canine partner made a mistake so I'll just let you go on your way with your pistol." You take the ride and have a lawyer fight to suppress the evidence.

    You can search this cite for recent canine sniff case law:

    http://fourthamendment.com/
    Last edited by Yard Sale; 07-30-2014 at 04:04 PM. Reason: linky

  24. #24
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Yard Sale View Post
    ...

    If the dog creates false PC for a search which does not turn up evidence of that PC, but turns up a gun or some other verboten contraband, what do you think will happen?...
    The dog had a reasonable belief at the time given the facts available to him at the time.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  25. #25
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Yard Sale View Post
    RAS = required for detention

    PC = required for search, arrest, or warrant

    Neither is required for an external plain look/plain smell, dog or not.

    If the dog creates false PC for a search which does not turn up evidence of that PC, but turns up a gun or some other verboten contraband, what do you think will happen? "Oh golly, my canine partner made a mistake so I'll just let you go on your way with your pistol." You take the ride and have a lawyer fight to suppress the evidence.

    You can search this cite for recent canine sniff case law:

    http://fourthamendment.com/
    Yet one costumed rights infringer claims.....

    " If the officer has RS/PC for a sniff he's going to call the dog BEFORE he gives the citation... Is no needs to "ask" or give the citation so your free to leave. He would just get the dog and have it there shortly and conduct the search.... Also the OP seemed to be asking what happens AFTER the search and something is found.. Not how to "avoid" said search..."

    If he already has RS/PC why call the dog.

    Seems to me a tacit admission that he doesn't and is using the dog as a RS/PC generator. Using dogs should be outlawed.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •