United States v. Democrus Burston

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the “use of a drug-sniffing dog did not constitute a search subject to the Fourth Amendment because the sniff occurred in a common hallway and the police officers were lawfully present”
• finding that Davis does not apply because no cases “serve as binding precedent to permit the drug-detection dog sniff in this factual context”
• finding an area six to ten inches from defendant’s, window to be part of the curtilage
• “[T]he area sniffed was in close proximity to Burston’s apartment—six to ten inches. That area is ‘immediately surrounding’ his residence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).