Legal Opinion

State v. Britton

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 19, 2009No. 24724PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KONENKAMP, Justice.

[¶ 1.] In 2004, the South Dakota Legislature mandated that police canine teams *901be certified and annually recertified before they can be used to assist in law enforcement. During a traffic stop, a drug detection dog, who had not been recertified, indicated the presence of an illegal substance in the stopped vehicle and a search uncovered 155 pounds of marijuana. After the driver’s motion to suppress was denied, he was convicted of possession and intent to distribute marijuana. On appeal, we conclude, first, that use of an uncerti-fied canine team does not necessarily compel…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Herring v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  3. United States v. Reyes Fabian Olivera-MendezCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2007
  4. United States v. Modesto DiazCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
  5. Hartpence v. Youth Forestry CampSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. GuerraSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
  2. State v. BrittonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State v. GuerraSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API