A drug sniffing dog needs a warrant before sniffing out drugs at a suspect’s home, the Florida Supreme Court ruled Thursday in a case that could hinder law enforcement officials who go after drug dealers, Florida’s attorney general said in response to the 5-2 decision.
Suspecting him of growing marijuana in his home, police sent drug sniffing pooch “Franky” to the front door of Joelis Jardines’ home and made an arrest after Franky’s sniffer found pot on the lot. The problem was they had no warrant to do so.
“Given the special status accorded a citizen’s home in Anglo-American jurisprudence, we hold that the warrantless ‘sniff test’ that was conducted at the front door of the residence in the present case was an unreasonable government intrusion into the sanctity of the home and violated the Fourth Amendment,” justice James Perry wrote for the majority.
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi said the decision would hamper efforts to crack down on drug dealers.
“The court’s decision clearly conflicts with binding U.S. Supreme Court precedent and decisions of courts nationwide,” Bondi said in a statement. “We will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn this flawed decision.”
Perry, however said a more fundamental issue was at stake.
“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,” Perry wrote. “Such an open-ended policy invites overbearing and harassing conduct.”
