• Dean's Welcome |
  • University of Wisconsin-Madison |
  • MyUW |
  • Directory |
  • Search
University of Wisconsin Law School
  • Law In Action
    • Our Tradition
    • Student Experience
    • Profiles
  • Prospective Students
    • JD Admissions
    • Graduate Programs
    • Transfer Students
  • Current Students
    • Career Services
    • Student Services
    • Student Organizations
  • Faculty
    • Faculty Directory
    • Faculty Resources
    • Workshops & Lectures
  • Alumni
    • Reunions
    • Giving
    • Staying Connected
  • Academics & Programs
    • Course Schedule
    • Curriculum
    • Experiential Learning
    • Centers & Programs
  • Library
  • Resource Center on Impaired Driving
    • Contact
    • Events
    • Federal OWI Case Law
    • Legislative Action
    • Links
    • News
    • OWI Statutes
    • Publications
    • Wisconsin OWI & Liquor Licensing Case Law

Resource Center on Impaired Driving

Federal OWI Related Case Law



Illinois v. Caballes  (full text)

U.S. Supreme Court

Illinois v. Caballes, 125 S. Ct. 834 (2005).
Decided January 24, 2005

Issue:  The Fourth Amendment as applied to dog sniffs during traffic stops

Holding:  Even without probable cause to believe the defendant possessed narcotics, a dog sniff conducted during a traffic stop did not violate defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights because the stop was lawful at its inception and otherwise executed in a reasonable manner. 

Summary:
    An Illinois state trooper stopped Caballes for speeding and radioed the police dispatcher to report the stop.  A second trooper overheard the transmission and drove to the scene with his narcotics-detection dog.  While the first trooper wrote Caballes a warning, the second trooper walked his dog around Caballes’ car.  The dog alerted at the trunk, and the officers searched the trunk and found marijuana.  Caballes was arrested charged with a narcotics offense.
    Caballes moved to suppress the seized evidence and to quash his arrest.  The trial court denied the motion, and Caballes was convicted.  The Appellate Court affirmed, and the Illinois Supreme Court reversed on the grounds that the dog sniff transformed a routine traffic stop into a drug investigation without justification.  
    The U.S. Supreme Court held that a justifiable seizure can become unlawful if it is prolonged beyond the time reasonably required to complete its goal.  Here, though, the duration of the stop was entirely justified by the traffic offense, considering that the second officer arrived with the dog and the sniff was conducted during the time it took the first officer to conduct the traffic stop and write the warning ticket.
    Further, the dog sniff did not infringe the defendant’s constitutionally protected interest in privacy, because it only revealed the presence of contraband that no citizen has the legal right to possess.

 

Log in to edit

University of Wisconsin Law School | 975 Bascom Mall, Madison, WI 53706 | (608) 262-2240 | Facebook | Twitter | Support UW Law School

Last Updated: Tuesday, July 3, 2007 | Copyright © 1998-2012 The University of Wisconsin Board of Regents. All Rights Reserved.