Tell tale signs to police that drugs are likely to be present in a stopped car

[Improvisor]

It always amazes me when I see teenagers driving around here with longer hair in older cars… and then have the balls to put a Bob Marley bumper sticker on the back!!! I mean, that is just asking for it.

[sqweels]

@Improvisor

It always amazes me when I see teenagers driving around here with longer hair in older cars… and then have the balls to put a Bob Marley bumper sticker on the back!!! I mean, that is just asking for it.

Ah, breathe that fresh air of freedom!

[Shodan]

@Bricker

The use of a drug dog is not a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. The cops cannot generally make you wait for hours for a dog to arrive, but if they’ve legitimately stopped you for another reason, they can use the time you’re detained for the citation to be written to have an already-present drug dog do a sniff. If he alerts, then they have probable cause to search.

Can the dog enter the vehicle to sniff without your consent? Or just sniff from outside?

Regards,
Shodan

[ChrisBooth12]

I would like to know this as well. I drive an “old-mans” car hopefully I will never get pulled over…I do keep air freshener in the car just in case but I don’t think it would work fast enough to save me.

[Gfactor]

@Shodan

Can the dog enter the vehicle to sniff without your consent? Or just sniff from outside?

Regards,
Shodan

It’s, er, complicated:

See United States v. Thomas, 787 F.Supp. 663, 684 (E.D. Tex. 1992) (just as a law enforcement officer cannot search the interior of an automobile without probable cause, a drug dog may not enter the trunk or passenger compartment of an automobile without probable cause). See also United States v. Stone, 866 F.2d 359, 363-64 (10th Cir. 1989) [*14] (drug dog’s instinctive reaction in jumping into open hatchback during sweep of exterior of vehicle did not violate Fourth Amendment); United States v. Hutchinson, 471 F.Supp.2d 497, 510 (M.D. Pa. 2007) (drug dog sniff of interior of vehicle not a search under the Fourth Amendment when handler did not encourage or assist dog’s entry into the vehicle); United States v. Watson, 783 F.Supp. 258, 265 (E.D. Va. 1992) (drug dog’s entry through open vehicle passenger door not a violation of Fourth Amendment where there was no evidence that handler encouraged dog to enter vehicle). But see Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405, 410, 125 S. Ct. 834, 160 L. Ed. 2d 842 (2005) (“The legitimate expectation that information about perfectly lawful activity will remain private is categorically distinguishable from respondent’s hopes or expectations concerning the nondetection of contraband in the trunk of his car. A dog sniff conducted during a concededly lawful traffic stop that reveals no information other than the location of a substance that no individual has any right to possess does not violate the Fourth Amendment.”).

United States v. Carrico, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28672 (W.D. Va. 2007) (refusing to address the issue after finding probable cause for search).

But many courts see this language:

The fact that officers walk a narcotics-detection dog around the exterior of each car at the Indianapolis checkpoints does not transform the seizure into a search. See United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 707, 77 L. Ed. 2d 110, 103 S. Ct. 2637 (1983). Just as in Place, an exterior sniff of an automobile does not require entry into the car and is not designed to disclose any information other than the presence or absence of narcotics. See ibid. Like the dog sniff in Place, a sniff by a dog that simply walks around a car is “much less intrusive than a typical search.” Ibid.

from City of Indianapolisy v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32; 121 S. Ct. 447; 148 L. Ed. 2d 333 (2000): http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=99-1030 as distinguishing exterior sniffs from interior ones. *E.g., *, United States v. Thomas, 787 F. Supp. 663, 684 (E.D. Tex. 1992), aff’d, 983 F.2d 1062 (5th Cir. 1993) (“[T]he placing of a dog inside the trunk and passenger compartment of a car must be considered an invasive search requiring probable cause. Just as an officer could not enter the passenger compartment or trunk of a vehicle to conduct a search without probable cause, neither can a canine be placed inside a car on less than this standard.”). However, this conclusion does not affect the result in this instance, as probable cause to search defendant’s car existed prior to the K-9 search and United States v. Gentle, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16294 (D. Mass. Mar. 4, 2008) (citing *Thomas *with approval).

[Shodan]

I lift up my hands in fervent thanks to the Almighty that IANAL.

And thanks to you for the response. Wish I knew what it means.

Regards,
Shodan

[Gfactor]

@Shodan

Wish I knew what it means.

Regards,
Shodan

Let me translate: We dunno what the Supreme Court will someday rule on the issue–in the meantime, it depends on a few different factors:

1. Whether the human police agents did anything to encourage the dog to enter the car (most cases say that if they didn’t, it’s probably ok).

2. The jurisdiction in which you are being tried. Courts are all over the place on this–two state or federal district courts could reach opposite conclusions based on the same fact pattern.

3. For now, maybe even which judge is hearing the motion to suppress. There is little binding precedent on point. In many cases, it’s going to be up to the trial judge.

[gonzomax]

I wonder how many dope smokers realize you can smell it when they drive by?

[pravnik]

@gonzomax

I wonder how many dope smokers realize you can smell it when they drive by?

Judging from some of my clients, a lot of dope smokers don’t realize that other people can smell it when their clothes and breath reek like they’ve been locked in a closet with a bong and a pound of weed for a week solid.

[Gfactor]

@pravnik

Judging from some of my clients, a lot of dope smokers don’t realize that other people can smell it when their clothes and breath reek like they’ve been locked in a closet with a bong and a pound of weed for a week solid.

A friend once told me it’s tough to smell it when you’re the one who smoked it.

[Thing_Fish]

A friend who is in cop school says that his instructor urges his charges to be on the lookout for “those little dancing bears” (i.e. Grateful Dead bumper stickers).

[SeanArenas]

Probably what city/state you’re in matters a lot. I live near Los Angeles, and spent the New Year’s break in San Francisco. I must tell you, the marijuana use is much more apparent there - no attempt to conceal it.

One example of several: 10:15am, standing in line at a cafe for breakfast, we’re actually on the sidewalk, and two guys are passing a spliff not 10 feet from me. There were tons and tons of people within sight/smell range. 10 people in front of us in line, people walking by on the street, the doorman at a hotel a few feet away. Some random guy walked over and joined in passing it with them.

I’ll bet if you smelled it coming from a car in SF, it’s coming from several cars.

[unclviny]

Several years ago I had a Louisiana State Trooper tell me that being on I-10 in the summertime with the windows down was a red flag and on pulling you over if your A/C worked they were “calling a Canine”.

Unclviny

[erislover]

My bumper sticker says, “Free or Drug Free, We Can’t Be Both” and I haven’t been searched since I’ve had it on. I expect it is more than just one or two signs that would make the cops bother.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@pravnik

Judging from some of my clients, a lot of dope smokers don’t realize that other people can smell it when their clothes and breath reek like they’ve been locked in a closet with a bong and a pound of weed for a week solid.

For that matter, I don’t remember being able to notice “recent cigarette odor” on a person until long after I had quit smoking, and the prevalence of tobacco use had dwindled to where it is today (at least in L.A.). I smoked off and on from about 1976 to 1995, and even in the off periods, I would never particularly notice the residual odor of recent smoking on another person. It was only when the habit became so rare that it became noticeable. Even non-smokers never seemed to notice or care back then, but remember I’m referring only to the odor of past smoking, not that of a cigarette currently being smoked.

[Uncle_Brother_Walker]

@SeanArenas

One example of several: 10:15am, standing in line at a cafe for breakfast, we’re actually on the sidewalk, and two guys are passing a spliff not 10 feet from me. There were tons and tons of people within sight/smell range. 10 people in front of us in line, people walking by on the street, the doorman at a hotel a few feet away. Some random guy walked over and joined in passing it with them.

I call this ‘hiding in plain sight’. Many a time I have been known to sit on a park bench with a book, light up and stay for 20 min or so.* (Of course, always checking the beat cops schedule.) Sometimes, as I’m walking down the road, I’ll take the sidewalk less used and fire it up.

My opinion is this: Regarding this topic, as with everything else in life, if you commit your action with confidence (as if this is what you do all the time and have no idea that others would not question it), you will not be caught. This is just what you do. I know I have been busted (by sight and smell) by others who just look at me and say ‘did you see that guy? Did you see what he is doing?’. Just keep moving, and nobody will bother you.

They never come back to talk to me. I just keep moving. A rolling stone gathers no moss, but a moving stoner gathers a good buzz.

[Obsidian]

@SeanArenas

Probably what city/state you’re in matters a lot. I live near Los Angeles, and spent the New Year’s break in San Francisco. I must tell you, the marijuana use is much more apparent there - no attempt to conceal it.

One example of several: 10:15am, standing in line at a cafe for breakfast, we’re actually on the sidewalk, and two guys are passing a spliff not 10 feet from me. There were tons and tons of people within sight/smell range. 10 people in front of us in line, people walking by on the street, the doorman at a hotel a few feet away. Some random guy walked over and joined in passing it with them.

I’ll bet if you smelled it coming from a car in SF, it’s coming from several cars.

Oh, it is. No one cares. People walk down the street with joints and you smell it randomly all the time.

[gladtobeblazed]

@pravnik

Judging from some of my clients, a lot of dope smokers don’t realize that other people can smell it when their clothes and breath reek like they’ve been locked in a closet with a bong and a pound of weed for a week solid.

:eek:

All of my friends say they can’t smell it on me. Perhaps it’s because I smoke outside in the breeze.

[ChrisBooth12]

I can’t even smell weed anymore. I never notice it on me or anything and must always spray

[The_Second_Stone]

@Obsidian

Oh, it is. No one cares. People walk down the street with joints and you smell it randomly all the time.

If you’re going to San Francisco
Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair
If you’re going to San Francisco
You’re gonna meet some gentle people there

For those who come to San Francisco
Summertime will be a love-in there
In the streets of San Francisco
Gentle people with flowers in their hair

I don’t smoke, but I do love The Cool, Gray, City of Love