Pubdate: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 Source: Boston Globe (MA) Copyright: 2004 Globe Newspaper Company Contact: http://www.boston.com/globe/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/52 Author: Lyle Denniston, Globe Correspondent JUSTICES TO WEIGH POLICE DOG CAR SEARCH WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court agreed yesterday to rule on the constitutionality of police using dogs to sniff for illegal drugs in vehicles stopped for routine traffic violations. In a brief order, the justices voted to hear an appeal by the State of Illinois arguing that sniff searches are not covered by the Constitution, so police are allowed to make them without having grounds for suspecting a vehicle may be carrying drugs. The Illinois Supreme Court, however, ruled that a canine search can be done only at a traffic stop if the officers have specific reasons to think there are drugs in a vehicle. Without those suspicions, the state court said, a routine traffic stop broadens into a drug investigation, and that can be justified only with some evidence greater that "a vague hunch." The case gives the Supreme Court an opportunity to explore an increasingly complex constitutional question: What more may officers do during routine traffic stops, beyond asking for a driver's license and registration? The court has issued a series of rulings detailing when police may search the interior of a stopped vehicle and what they may do with the passengers. In the current court term, the justices already are examining whether a state may make it a crime for a stopped motorist to refuse to identify himself when asked to do so by officers. The new case, to be heard in the fall with a decision likely next year, stems from a traffic stop of a speeding vehicle by an Illinois state trooper. After pulling over a car from Nevada, the officer checked with headquarters on the validity of the driver's license and his registration and on whether the operator had a criminal record. While that check was occurring, an officer on drug patrol arrived on his own with a dog. The dog circled the car and led officers to the car's trunk. Marijuana with a street value of more than $250,000 was found there. The Nevadan, Roy I. Caballes, was convicted of one count of marijuana trafficking, given a 12-year sentence, and fined the street value of the drugs. Caballes contended that the dog search was unconstitutional, because the traffic stop was solely for speeding, with nothing to suggest that he had drugs in his car. In its appeal to the Supreme Court, the State of Illinois contended that a sniff search by a trained dog involves only a minor intrusion into personal privacy. It argued that a sniffing dog is not even making a search, in a constitutional sense. The Supreme Court also agreed yesterday to hear a case that tests whether the US government may prosecute an individual for using a telephone or other wire communication in this country as part of a scheme to avoid paying taxes to another country. The case involves New Yorkers who were convicted of wire fraud for arranging to have liquor bought in Maryland shipped to Canada without paying that country's steep liquor import taxes. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake