COURT: DRUG EVIDENCE PERMISSIBLE

Trucker Had Been Pulled Over Near St. Onge For Log Book Check

PIERRE - A random stop to check a trucker's log book, unexpectedly
resulting in a drug arrest, was not illegal, the state Supreme Court ruled
3-2 Thursday.

The decision means evidence found in the truck may be used against driver
Scott Rechtenbach, who was stopped Dec. 26, 2000, near St. Onge by state
trooper Brian Swets. Swets, a canine officer whose primary job is drug
detection, decided that day to instead pull over truckers and make sure
their commercial documents were in order.

When Rechtenbach said his logbook was not current, the officer asked him to
get out of the truck. For safety, Swets patted him down and found a wire
with white residue on it. Recognizing that such devices are used to clean
drug pipes, Swets had his dog sniff around the truck.

The officer said he found two glass pipes, a pill and a bottle of alcohol
in the truck. Rechtenbach was indicted for driving under the combined
influence of drugs or alcohol and two counts of drug possession.

But the search was ruled unconstitutional by Circuit Judge Timothy Johns of
Deadwood, placing Rechtenbach's trial on hold until the state could appeal.
The judge said warrantless searches of trucks are not allowed during random
regulatory stops because there are no limits as to the time, place and
scope of such searches.

Overruling Johns, the state Supreme Court said officers need the ability to
randomly stop trucks because they can damage roads and endanger other
traffic. The trucking industry is highly regulated by both state and
federal governments, the high court noted, and truckers may be stopped for
inspections at any time.

''The fact that evidence of criminal activity was uncovered as the result
of a stop does not render the stop or the seizure of the evidence
unconstitutional,'' wrote Acting Justice Max Gors.

''Articulable and reasonable suspicion is not necessary for administrative
stops and searches of closely regulated industries,'' Gors continued.

Roving searches of trucks should not be allowed, wrote dissenting Justice
Robert A. Amundson, who said a random logbook check should not be turned
into a fishing expedition for drugs.

''This is a case where a random stop was for the sole purpose of resolving
the query, 'What should I do today to give Rufus, the drug dog, some
exercise,' " Amundson wrote.