When it Comes to Drugs, The Nose Does Not Always Know
If you are facing drug charges in a case where a drug sniffing dog or a police officer’s assertion that he or she smelled marijuana was the reason that you, your vehicle, or your property was searched, refuting the reliability of drug dogs and officer smell tests may play an important role in your defense. Even though both drug dogs and an officer’s sense of smell are permitted to serve as the basis for a search under Texas law, numerous studies have found both methods to be unreliable predictors of the presence of drugs.
For example, a pair of studies suggests that there are two fundamental flaws with relying on trained dogs to detect drugs. Both a study which was conducted by the Chicago Tribune and a study which was published in the Journal of Animal Cognition by Researchers from the University of California at Davis suggest that drug dogs often alert in areas where drugs are not present and have not been present. The frequency of false alerts is so high that the dogs are actually wrong more often than they are right.
The same two studies also pointed to something even more disturbing regarding drug dogs’ abilities to sniff out illegal substances. We all know that dogs are incredibly sensitive to even the most subtle feelings of the people that they have close relationships with. Drug dogs have strong bonds with their handlers, and when those handlers believe that drugs are present in a situation, the dogs are likely to alert even if there are no drugs in the area. Also, if a dog’s handler has any racial bias, the dog that they are handling will often alert on people of the race that the handler is biased against, whether or not drugs are present.
Police officers are allowed to stop or arrest and search people if they believe that they smell marijuana. As you can imagine, this results in quite a few searches. Two studies that were published in Law and Human Behavior examined the reliability of the officer smell test. One study found that officers who stand at a driver’s window and assert that they can smell marijuana that is supposedly in the trunk of the vehicle are not actually able to detect that odor from that position, because of other smells that are normally present during a roadside traffic stop, such as diesel fuel. The second study examined an even more improbable situation, where officers assert that they can smell marijuana in the chimney fumes from a marijuana growing facility. As one might expect, the study found that this simply does not happen.
Fortunately, Texas courts are becoming increasingly aware of the problems associated with relying on drug sniffing dogs and police officers’ noses to detect the presence of controlled substances. In 2010, the highest criminal court in Texas overturned a conviction based on identification of the suspect by a drug sniffing dog. Winfrey v. State, 323 S.W. 3rd 875 (2010)
If the search that led to your drug charges occurred because a drug sniffing dog alerted near you or a police officer believed that they smelled marijuana near you, that search may have been invalid. A knowledgeable East Texas defense attorney can help you to present your best possible case to the court and help you to achieve the best possible results under the circumstances. To learn more, call Longview criminal defense attorney Alex Tyra today to schedule your free consultation. We can be reached at (903) 753-7499, or you may visit website to submit a convenient online contact form.