K9 Handler Shoots Pipe Wielding Suspect
Because of the Nature of the Incident, I have turned off comments on this post.
Talk about this scenario at training:
Author: King
Daniel King is the founder of Handlernet, Invictus Tactical Co, and the Invictus Law Dog. As he police officer he has worked in Patrol, K9, SWAT, and Street Crimes/ Problem Solving. He currently works in Law Enforcement and is a US Veteran.
Talk about this scenario at training:
0
Briefing-12-5-11
News and Events for the Week of December 5, 2011 1. Law Dog Registration is Open! 2012 Invictus Law Dog will be held Feb 20-23, 2012, Las Vegas. CLICK HERE for more information. 2. Call For Presenters. The 2012 Invictus Law Dog is looking for presenters. If you're an experienced officer, handler, or trainer and have something to offer, we'd like to talk. CLICK HERE. 3. Free webinar on Gunshot Wounds in Working Dogs. Dr Baker of Veterinary Tactical Group has developed an online training program for the emergency treatment of our partners. Do everything you can to save him. More info, CLICK HERE. 4. UC-Davis Incident- New video of the incident that made headlines in the US has been released. CLICK HERE.0
On Nov 3, 2006, Detective Pedraja of the Miami Dade PD received an unverified crime stoppers tip stating marijuana was being cultivated at the residence where Joelis Jardines, the Defendant, was later arrested.
On December 6th, what sounds like a HIDTA team set up on his house. After about 15 minutes K9 arrived and the team set up containment on the house. Detective Bartlet and "Franky" went to the front door, where Franky began sniffing, gave a change in behavior and a final response. Detective Bartlet called the alert and notified Detective Pedraja. Pedraja approached the door and plainly smelled "live marijuana" himself. He knocked to obtain consent to search, however nobody answered. Based on the tip, K9 alert, and plain smell, Pedraja left and obtained a Search Warrant.
Upon service of the warrant, Jardines was arrested trying to run out the back by containment. Inside the house was around 179 plants.
At trial, Jardines claimed it a violation of his rights and the courts granted the motion to suppress the evidence. The district courts reversed and allowed it. Jardines, then appealed the Florida Supreme Court.
The Florida Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jardines. They looked at two issues.
They use the point of the sniff at a private residence to say that, unlike the other sniff cases (Place,Edmond, Caballes) it also constitutes an intrusive procedure that exposes the resident to humiliation and embarrassment.
Does this mean the outcome may have been different if it was just the handler and maybe another officer? I believe the distinction they were trying to make is that it was theatrical production for everyone to see and not simply a few personnel conducting the sniff in a low key manner.
Declaring that it was in fact a search, the court stated Probable Cause, not reasonable suspicion, was needed to conduct a sniff at a private residence.
Stay tuned for Part two of this case. Until we meet again, below is the Florida Supreme Court Opinion. Read it and let me know what you think.
Get the Florida Supreme Court Opinion Florida v. Jardines.
Florida V. Jardines
Disclaimer: I have no independent or first hand knowledge of this case outside my personal experience conducting these sniffs and reading the Florida Supreme Court Opinion. This is not Legal Advice, jut my .02¢
On January 6th the Supreme Court agreed to hear Florida V. Jardines, a case that will affect detector dog handlers and law enforcement operations in general. The issue at hand is whether having your dope dog sniff the front door of a private residence, without a warrant, constitutes and unreasonable search.On Nov 3, 2006, Detective Pedraja of the Miami Dade PD received an unverified crime stoppers tip stating marijuana was being cultivated at the residence where Joelis Jardines, the Defendant, was later arrested.
On December 6th, what sounds like a HIDTA team set up on his house. After about 15 minutes K9 arrived and the team set up containment on the house. Detective Bartlet and "Franky" went to the front door, where Franky began sniffing, gave a change in behavior and a final response. Detective Bartlet called the alert and notified Detective Pedraja. Pedraja approached the door and plainly smelled "live marijuana" himself. He knocked to obtain consent to search, however nobody answered. Based on the tip, K9 alert, and plain smell, Pedraja left and obtained a Search Warrant.
Upon service of the warrant, Jardines was arrested trying to run out the back by containment. Inside the house was around 179 plants.
At trial, Jardines claimed it a violation of his rights and the courts granted the motion to suppress the evidence. The district courts reversed and allowed it. Jardines, then appealed the Florida Supreme Court.
The Florida Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jardines. They looked at two issues.
- Whether a "sniff test" by a dope dog at the front door of a private residence is a search under the 4th Amendment and, if so;
- Whether the evidentiary showing of wrongdoing that the goverment must make prior to conducting such a search is PC or RS.
The Fourth Amendment provides that “[t]he 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.” U.S. Const. amend. IV.In addressing the first issue, the court called the sniff a "sophisticated undertaking." They pointed to the fact that it was a sustained and coordinated effort because it involved multiple police vehicles, officers and tactical personnel from different agencies. The entire process lasted for hours in plain view of the general public, disallowing anonymity for the resident.
Such a public spectacle unfolding in a residential neighborhood will invariably entail a degree of public opprobrium, humiliation and embarrassment for the resident, for such dramatic government activity in the eyes of many— neighbors, passers-by, and the public at large—will be viewed as an official accusation of crime. Further, if government agents can conduct a dog “sniff test” at a private residence without any prior evidentiary showing of wrongdoing, there is nothing to prevent the agents from applying the procedure in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner, or based on whim and fancy, at the home of any citizen. Such an open-ended policy invites overbearing and harassing conduct.
They use the point of the sniff at a private residence to say that, unlike the other sniff cases (Place,Edmond, Caballes) it also constitutes an intrusive procedure that exposes the resident to humiliation and embarrassment.
Does this mean the outcome may have been different if it was just the handler and maybe another officer? I believe the distinction they were trying to make is that it was theatrical production for everyone to see and not simply a few personnel conducting the sniff in a low key manner.
Accordingly, we conclude that a “sniff test,” such as the test that was conducted in the present case, is a substantial government intrusion into the sanctity of the home and constitutes a “search” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. As such, it must be preceded by an evidentiary showing of wrongdoing.
Declaring that it was in fact a search, the court stated Probable Cause, not reasonable suspicion, was needed to conduct a sniff at a private residence.
To be continueed........
Stay tuned for Part two of this case. Until we meet again, below is the Florida Supreme Court Opinion. Read it and let me know what you think.
Get the Florida Supreme Court Opinion Florida v. Jardines.
2012 Shot Show
Each year the National Shooting Sports Foundation hosts the largest Outdoor, Hunting, Sportsman show in the world. Law Enforcement was incorporated about 7 years ago and has become the largest gear display in the world.
View a list of exhibitors HERE.
Back to the Briefing
0
havis.com
Havis.com has just released their new mobile site. They are good people that make great quality gear. Check out their website at havis.com and see them at the 2012 Invictus Law Dog.1