In the Supreme Court case of Florida v. Jardines the court has voted six to three in favor of Florida. The Fourth Amendment states that a person is not able to be searched without a warrant or probable cause. And that the “sniff search” is considered to be probable cause because it does not invade a person’s private life but the narcotics dog was only looking for evidence of narcotics. And the search is not intrusive on a person’s private life. And the State of Florida acted constitutionally but searching and arresting Jardines.
This case is much like United States v. Place, the Court ruled that the United States did not violate the probable cause because a “sniff test” was used and it does not intrude on a persons privacy and it only looked for illegal narcotics.
In the Case of Illinois v. Caballes the Court ruled that Illinois did acted constitutionally because a “sniff test” was used after Caballes was pulled over on the highway for speeding and a narcotics dog was called in to do a “sniff test”. And Caballes being pulled over first was also considered probable cause for search.
Florida v. Jardines is not like Indianapolis v. Edmond. Because the Court ruled that Indianapolis acted in unconstitutionally because they set up a highway checkpoint to have a “sniff test” on every vehicle and they were considered to be trying to find criminals. This was unconstitutional because there were no reasons to search unlike in the other cases.