San Diego Law Review
Document Type
Comments
Abstract
The propriety of using drug detection dogs to establish probable cause for search was argued in United States v. Solis. Because cases similar to Solis are sure to arise in the future, and because courts are unable to agree on the proper way to treat drug-sniffing dogs, the use of narcotic detection dogs is certain to be a persistent problem. Law enforcement agencies have too much invested in their dog training programs to placidly accept the Solis decision. If the Solis rational is followed in future decisions, the use of these highly trained dogs will be severely limited. Because the proper use of detection dogs is unclear it is necessary to discuss the consequences of Solis and how the case may be followed or overruled in the future.
Recommended Citation
Max A. Hansen,
United States v. Solis: Have the Government's Supersniffers Come Down with a Case of Constitutional Nasal Congestion?,
13
San Diego L. Rev.
410
(1976).
Available at:
https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol13/iss2/8