ILLINOIS HIGH COURT LIMITS USE OF DRUG-SNIFFING DOGS IN TRAFFIC STOPS

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - Police who pull over motorists for traffic violations
must have solid reasons to suspect a crime before they can call in
drug-sniffing dogs, a divided Illinois Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The court threw out a drug charge against a Wayne County woman police
stopped for a traffic violation and on whom a drug dog found a small amount
of marijuana.

The head of a state police organization predicted the ruling will lead to
challenges every time a drug-sniffing dog is used.

The 4-3 ruling included a lengthy dissent that dog "sniffs" are not
searches and that privacy rights aren't violated when the scent of drugs
escapes from the car.

The court also struck down a law prohibiting people from letting
intoxicated minors leave their homes.

In the drug-dog ruling, Justice Charles Freeman wrote that a Fairfield,
Ill., police officer had no reason to summon a dog when he pulled over Anne
F. Cox's car in 1998.

It was a routine traffic stop that Freeman said Officer Matt McCormick
expanded into a drug investigation, detaining Cox longer than the
Constitution allows.

"If we held that Officer McCormick was justified in calling the canine
unit, we would clearly support the view that police officers can resort to
the use of canine units at every traffic stop," Freeman wrote.

But Justice Robert Thomas, joined in dissent by Justices Thomas Fitzgerald
and Rita Garman, argued that the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled
that dog sniffs are not searches governed by the Fourth Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, he said, the Illinois Constitution is not
more protective.

"Because a canine sniff is not a search, we should reject the conclusion
that the police need a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity before
they may conduct a canine sniff of a lawfully detained vehicle," Thomas wrote.

Cox's attorney, Dan Evers of the Office of the State Appellate Defender,
said the decision should put a check on renegade officers who call out dogs
with no justification.

But Dave Weigand, president of the Illinois Association of Chiefs of
Police, said the ruling will leave conscientious officers hamstrung.

In the drunken minor case, the court threw out a law that allowed the
prosecution of party hosts who let young people leave their homes intoxicated.

It was unconstitutional because it gave no guidance on how a host should
prevent the minor's departure, Chief Justice Mary Ann McMorrow wrote in the
opinion. Restraining someone could expose the host to a felony charge of
unlawful restraint, she said.

Brad Fralick of Mothers Against Drunk Driving said he called to state
officials Thursday to begin working on rewriting the law.