Significant Decision Report: Supreme Court
Summarized from Voice for the Defense; May 2013, Volume 42, No. 4
Bailey v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 1031 (2013)
Usually detaining someone requires a showing of probable cause. Under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), there is an exception that allows a person to be detained during the execution of a search warrant. The rationale for this exception is to ensure officer safety, facilitate completion of the search, and prevent the person from fleeing the scene. In Bailey v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 1031 (2013), the court found that this exception should be limited to the immediate vicinity of the premises to be searched. The exception did not apply to a defendant who left the general area of the apartment to be searched and was stopped and detained over a mile away, even though the officers found keys on the defendant connecting him to the apartment being searched.
Florida v. Harris, 133 S. Ct. 1050 (2013)
Drugs found by a narcotics dog can be suppressed if the dog is found to be unreliable, and therefore there was a lack of probable cause to search the car after the dog alerted. In Florida v. Harris, 133 S. Ct. 1050 (2013), the court found that the State did not have to present “an exhaustive set of records” to establish a dog’s reliability. A totality of the circumstances test must be used to determine probable cause, and just because there was a lack of records does not mean there is an automatic finding that the dog was unreliable. The State in this case presented substantial evidence on the dog’s training and his proficiency in finding drugs.