October Term 2012 · Docket 11-817
Does a trained dog's alert alone prove probable cause to search a vehicle?
Florida and Harris disagree on whether a dog's alert alone proves probable cause to search a vehicle.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Garre argued that a trained dog's alert establishes probable cause to search a vehicle.
Mr. Gifford argued that no canine exception exists to the totality of the circumstances test.
Mr. Palmore argued that trained dogs reliably detect target odors in critical security roles.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-15
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case asks if a trained dog's alert alone proves probable cause to search a vehicle.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 31, 2012.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-15
What each side wants
Florida wants the Court to hold that a dog's alert alone proves probable cause.
Harris wants the Court to require courts to examine the dog's reliability.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
What each side says
Florida argues a dog's alert alone establishes probable cause to search a vehicle.
Harris argues courts must apply the totality of the circumstances test.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked how a judge determines if a police department's training is adequate.
Justice Sotomayor asked what specific legal rule the state wants the Court to announce.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-15
Why it matters
This dispute defines the standard for using drug dogs to search vehicles without a warrant.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 25-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 25-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-27 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-15
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 17-35 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 17-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-23
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.