- Florida v. Jardines case brief summary
- 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
- Katz: The officers were gathering info in an area belonging to Jardines and his curtilage
- The home is the very core of 4th am. rights and the area immediately surrounding and associated with the home.
- The front porch is a classic example of the area to which home life extends
- So yes- protected area
- State: they had to right to walk up to the front door, even girl scouts do it
- If someone is going up to someone’s door it is permissible to go knock, if they are not invited in they should leave
- Scalia is saying this is a trespass on the home
- A knocker does not have an invitation to engage in canine forensic investigation
- Their objective behavior was to conduct a search, which is not what anyone would think they had a license to do
- Scalia focuses on the purpose
- Scalia references Jones
- When the government obtains information by physically intruding on the persons, houses, papers, or effects constitutes a search
- CONCURRING: similar to Kyllo- the officers used a device (the dog) not in general public use to explore details of a home
- DISSENT: a reasonable person can expect odors to be smelled from outside
- The search of walking up to the door and back took about a minute or two
- There is no case law to back up the unlawfulness of walking to a door with a dog on a leash
- Difference from King
- 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
No comments:
Post a Comment