Idaho Supreme Court· 10/5/2021

State v. Randall

Citations

169 Idaho 358
496 P.3d 844

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that the description of the dog’s behavior as “instinctive” is inapt because there is nothing innate about a dog seeking out narcotics
holding that, once a drug dog’s entry is determined to be a search, the “proper inquiry is whether [law enforcement] had probable cause to believe illegal drugs were in [the suspect’s] car before” the drug dog entered the vehicle
holding that there was no “evidence in the record on which to base a finding of probable cause” in part because the canine officer failed “to explain why [a drug dog’s] behavior was an objectively reliable indication that narcotics were present”
explaining that the property-based test is objective such that the drug dog’s “motivation, instinctual or otherwise, is irrelevant.”
holding drug dog’s interior sniff of vehicle was a search
stating “no evidence supported that [the dog] entered Randall’s car because [the dog] detected the odor of narcotics”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

48 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.