State v. Antonacci

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a positive canine alert is a factor to consider in determining probable cause
• finding that a positive 17 canine alert supports a connection to narcotics activity only when “combined with other 18 credible evidence clearly connecting the money to drugs”
• finding that in light of currency contamination, “the continued reliance of courts and law enforcement officers on [a dog alert] to separate ‘legitimate’ currency from ‘drug- connected’ currency is logically indefensible”
• rejecting government’s contention that drug dealers carry their money in plastic bags
• distinguishing-previous cases upholding forfeiture of currency where claimants had traveled on an airplane to or from a drug source city, stating that claimant was merely “driving a car when he ran a stop sign”
• distinguishing previous cases upholding forfeiture of currency where claimants had traveled on an airplane to or from a drug source city, stating that claimant was merely \driving a car when he ran a stop sign\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).