The cops carried out a search on the basis of unconfirmed data by going to Jardines residence. This enabled Jardines to identify the marijuana and a warrant for a legal search was issued. The officers applied for a warrant and the material was seized. Your assertion that police officers would not have seen the narcotics changed the outcome of this case is incorrect. Because your argument asks the question if human senses would be appropriate for this scenario. In the details of the case, it was also noted that police officers detected marijuana smells, similar to those of the dog. It is possible that officers could detect marijuana odors without the assistance of dogs.
Thank you, Alyssa.
The police shouldn’t be able to walk up to someone’s home and inspect it without prior notice, you argue. Justice Kagan’s assertion that privacy rights are in question here is supported by this. It also highlights the difference in trespass rights between police enforcement and the general public. But, your claim that the police could violate the privacy of the detainee if it was a traffic stop is incorrect. He would have been under investigation. A legitimate source of probable cause must be used to support a search warrant. Police cannot arrest a suspect on suspicion alone. They must also have credible sources of probable cause.