Court to hear case of Franky the drug dog
Legal News Center
In a case closely watched by law enforcement nationwide, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide whether a Florida police dog's sniff outside the front door of a house with a marijuana growing operation is an illegal search.
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi wants the justices to reverse a state Supreme Court decision that the K-9's sniff runs afoul of the Fourth Amendment protection against illegal search and seizure. Eighteen states and the territory of Guam have filed a brief in support of Bondi's position, concerned that other state courts might start issuing similar decisions.
"If the Florida Supreme Court's decision stands, it could have a profound chilling effect on law enforcement efforts to combat illegal drugs," the states' filing says. "The Florida Supreme Court's decision jeopardizes the states' ability to use this crucial tool to discover illegal drugs prior to their distribution."
The case arose from the December 2006 arrest of Joelis Jardines at a Miami-area house where 179 marijuana plants were confiscated. Miami-Dade Police Department officers obtained a search warrant after one of their dogs, a chocolate Lab named Franky, detected the odor of pot from outside the front door.
The trial judge threw out the evidence, agreeing with Jardines' attorney that the dog's sniff was an unconstitutional intrusion into the home. An appeals court reversed that ruling, but the state Supreme Court sided in April with the original judge.
Related listings
-
US Supreme Court asked to ponder drug dog's sniff
Legal News Center 01/04/2012Franky the drug dog's supersensitive nose is at the heart of a question being put to the U.S. Supreme Court: Does a police dog's sniff outside a house give officers the right to get a search warrant for illegal drugs, or is the sniff an unconstitutio...
-
Court delays border-crossing pollution rule
Legal News Center 01/01/2012A federal court Friday put on hold a controversial Obama administration regulation aimed at reducing power plant pollution in 27 states that contributes to unhealthy air downwind. More than a dozen electric power companies, municipal power plant oper...
-
Federal judge blocks Calif. low-carbon fuels rule
Legal News Center 12/30/2011California officials say they will ask a federal judge to stay his ruling that blocks the state from enforcing the first-in-the-nation mandate for cleaner, low-carbon fuels. In a decision issued Thursday, Fresno-based U.S. District Court Judge Lawren...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.