« Court Opinions January 21, 2005 | Main | Tulia Judge Speaks Out »


Daniel Quackenbush

I agree 100%; well 99.9%. Once probable cause is established, the Supreme Court has held that the "automobile exception" (or Caroll doctrine) allows a search of a vehicle without a search warrant. Hopefully, Alaska doesn't have it's own Caroll doctrine under its state constitution.


Recognizing the automobile exception, I am arguing that cops should have to have at least probable cause to run a drug dog search. If the dog alerts to the presence of drugs, we can argue about whether a search warrant is needed or whether the ability to remove the automobile and the evidence quickly would take away that warrant. It is bothersome ot me, though, that the cops do not even need reasonable suspicion (a lower burden than probable cause) to run a drug dog search.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo


  • Naknek Trout
    Photos of various places throughout Alaska
Blog powered by Typepad