Florida v. Jardines case brief

1. Florida v. Jardines case brief summary

1. Detective Predraja received an unverified tip that weed was being grown in Jardines home. He took a drug dog there that sniffed the front porch. When he found the strongest odor point he sat by the front door. Predraja then filed and executed a search warrant. Search revealed weed plants
2. Katz: The officers were gathering info in an area belonging to Jardines and his curtilage
1. The home is the very core of 4th am. rights and the area immediately surrounding and associated with the home.
2. The front porch is a classic example of the area to which home life extends
3. So yes- protected area
3. State: they had to right to walk up to the front door, even girl scouts do it
1. If someone is going up to someone’s door it is permissible to go knock, if they are not invited in they should leave
2. Scalia is saying this is a trespass on the home
1. A knocker does not have an invitation to engage in canine forensic investigation
2. Their objective behavior was to conduct a search, which is not what anyone would think they had a license to do
3. Scalia focuses on the purpose
3. Scalia references Jones
1. When the government obtains information by physically intruding on the persons, houses, papers, or effects constitutes a search
4. CONCURRING: similar to Kyllo- the officers used a device (the dog) not in general public use to explore details of a home
5. DISSENT: a reasonable person can expect odors to be smelled from outside
1. The search of walking up to the door and back took about a minute or two
2. There is no case law to back up the unlawfulness of walking to a door with a dog on a leash
6. Difference from King
1. They used a “device” to smell the weed and the human didn’t initially, rather than a human who smelled the weed

Support us by: 
Visiting: http://www.fbdetox.com to rid yourself of that almost criminal social media addiction. Checking out our amazing store on Etsy: http://www.bohobuttons.com