by Jason Purgason
© This article is copyrighted original work and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed written consent of the author.
An old adage holds that “Those who do not learn from history are bound to repeat it.” I find that this unfortunately is the case among too many police dog handlers. This “history” that I refer to is case law that applies to the police working dog team. Canine case law deals with many issues, from the Fourth Amendment to the Fourteenth Amendment. If we study it, it will explain to us when, where and how we can more effectively utilize our police canines. I find that generally, there are two basic problems with those who do not take the time to research and study case law.
First, are those who do not understand what the courts have decided in certain cases and they make the same mistakes that have been made in previous cases. In these instances, their cases are dismissed, criminals go free, or they find themselves and their department in the middle of a lawsuit.
Secondly, are those handlers who do not understand previous rulings and do little or nothing. These handlers commonly do not properly utilize their canines because they do not want to make a mistake. They do not understand what they can do with their dogs and do not want to make the wrong decision. Therefore, they do not utilize their canines or they under utilize them.
Another issue that I have observed in my dealings with district attorneys and prosecutors is that they often must handle many different types of cases, from murders to forgeries. Canine related cases are much fewer and far in between as compared to all of the other cases that they deal with. Therefore, they are often spread thin and unfortunately canine cases do not land high upon their rankings of cases that they are adequately prepared for. On the other hand, defense attorneys generally have more time to spend with individual cases. Some of them often specialize in certain areas, one of those being canine related cases. This can often cause an unbalanced court preceeding for and ill prepared canine handler.
Should you be able to recite, word for word, United States v. Place? No. That is not what I am suggesting at all. However, I do feel that you will be better prepared and more confident on the stand if you are capable of citing that United States v. Place was the 1983 landmark Supreme Court case that stated that “a canine sniff is not a search” By being able to establish this in court you will be able to give a judge, prosecutor and defense attorney something to “study” and make your case easier to prosecute successfully.
I feel that every law enforcement officer that handles a police canine should be well versed on the case law and court decisions that affect them. I highly recommend meeting with your prosecutor prior to trying canine related cases and discuss with them the previous decisions that affect your case. By studying case law and better understanding it, you will be able to work your dog on the street with confidence. You will be more capable of making sound, split second decisions and capable of “pushing the envelope” within the law. Your will be more successful and far more productive when you fully understand what you can and cannot do with you dog.
If you would like to discuss how our Police Canine Case Law Seminar may benefit your department and receive a free copy of Case Law Reference for Police Canine Handlers, please call us or email us at jpurgason@highlandcanine.com
