IGX

Florida Supreme Court granted the motion on appeal, ruling that evidence that the dog has been trained and certified to detect narcotics, standing alone, is not sufficient to establish the dog’s reliability for purposes of determining probable cause. The court held that the state has the burden of showing the officer had a reasonable basis for believing the dog was reliable by presenting evidence on matters such as training field performance records. The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently granted the state’s request to review the decision. In its amicus brief, The Rutherford Institute documents empirical research showing dog alerts are not inherently reliable. One recent study at the University of California—Davis, showed that in a test where handlers were told drugs might be found at the test site, but no drugs were present, dogs gave false positive alerts an astonishing 85% of the time.

protobuilder wrote:I wonder how often the cops bring in dogs and say they alerted even if the dogs didn't.

Pinky wrote:It's OK to do this as long as you only do it to people who your prejudices suggest are probably guilty.

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:Local K9 guy uses 2 phrases.

Find it! Means actually look
Get it! Means scratch on the tire or car to indicate probably cause

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:You took the words right out of his mouth.