Right of the people to be secure in their homes test
One of the classes at any Police Academy is the class on the citizen’s rights under the United States Constitution. Police power is controlled by the rights listed in this document and any suspected violation will be judged by the courts. There are 23 citizen rights outlined in the first ten amendments and four in the very first amendment. New police cadets must know how these rights are protected and conversely how they can be violated. In our system of government, there are three branches, each responsible for a part of the law of the land. The legislative branch makes the laws, the executive branch enforces these laws and the judicial branch interprets them when there is a problem.
How many times does a police officer hear this statement coming from a person just arrested, "You can not arrest me, I know my rights"? Just how many people can recite the above mentioned 23 rights? The answer is not many. But, criminals do know that there is a right to remain silent and have no idea what amendment guarantees this right or that the police must have a reason to search a person for drugs or a gun. The so called "search and seizure" amendment causes the police the most problems. This examiner recalls an instructor recanting that defense lawyers seek cases involving questionable searches because courts think the police need to have more control and side with the defense. The instructor ended the class by saying, even if you lose the case, the drugs are taken off the street. This may be what will happen in the case now before the United States Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court announced Friday it will decide whether a drug-sniffing police dog at the front door is the same as an unconstitutional search of a home. Miami police used a police dog named Franky after they received an anonymous tip in 2006 that Joelis Jardines was growing marijuana inside his home. As police and federal drug enforcement officers surrounded the residence, Franky and two detectives approached the front door.
Franky was "alerted" to the odor of marijuana and one of the detectives said he then smelled it, too. When no one answered the door, police used the information to get a warrant, found 179 marijuana plants and arrested Jardines as he ran out the back door. The Florida Supreme Court agreed with Jardines’s assertion that the use of a drug-sniffing dog based on an anonymous tip was an unconstitutional intrusion into the sanctity of a private residence.
The fourth Amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "
To sanction and approve turning the ‘dogs loose’ on the homes of Florida citizens is the antithesis of freedom of private property and the expectation of privacy as we have known it and contrary to who we are as a free people," Justice R. Fred Lewis wrote in concurring with the court majority. Florida, joined by 18 other states, told the Supreme Court that allowing the ruling to stand would threaten a widely used drug-fighting tactic and that it conflicts with the high court’s precedents.
The justices have agreed that drug-sniffing dogs can be used in cases involving traffic stops and inspecting luggage and packages. But the Florida Supreme Court noted that a home is different, and that the high court had ruled against the use of thermal devices to detect heat that might be the result of marijuana-growing techniques inside a private home.
Florida v. Jardines , which probably will be argued in April, is sure to increase the fame of Franky, a chocolate Labrador retriever that has since retired from police work. The Associated Press has reported that the dog was responsible for the seizure of more than 2.5 tons of marijuana, 80 pounds of cocaine and $4.9 million in drug-contaminated money.
Bottom line is that the 179 marijuana plants will never be made in to pot and smoked by some teenager who just might attempt to drive under the influence and kill someone. If the old instructor was right, the court may decide that this case did involve an evasion of privacy and it will have the same effect as law meaning the police just lost a tool (drug sniffing dog) to permit a search of a pot growing "home". Would you like to live next to Mr. Jardines?
Comments