Phillip H. Fauver v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Place and Caballes are distinguishable and that dog sniff of home invades reasonable expectation of privacy
• noting that “a strict apartment versus single-family house distinction . . . would apportion Fourth Amendment protections on grounds that correlate with income, race, and ethnicity”
• explaining that 40.9 percent of households that earned less than $10,000 live in single-unit, detached houses, while 84 percent of households earning more than $120,000 did so
• “Distinguishing Jardines based on the differences between the front porch of a stand-alone house and the closed hallways of an apartment building draws arbitrary lines.”
• discussing different types of apartment buildings and suggesting that distinguishing between them would be arbitrary
• distinguishing Fourth Amendment concerns attendant to using drug-sniff- ing dogs on homes compared to sniffs performed in public places

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).