Florida’s 5th District Court of Appeal has ruled that law enforcement officers cannot conduct warrantless vehicle searches solely based on alerts from trained police dogs.
The decision highlights the inability of drug-sniffing dogs to differentiate between legal and illegal cannabis products, such as medical marijuana and hemp-derived products.
Judges noted that during a vehicle search prompted by a canine alert, officers could not determine whether the dog detected an illegal substance like cocaine, heroin, or marijuana, or a legal product such as hemp or properly prescribed medical marijuana. The court emphasized, “The dog’s alert did not tell them which target substance(s) had been detected. Whether the substance smelled was legal or illegal was not readily apparent, and thus his alert, alone, could not provide the probable cause needed to justify a warrantless search.”
A prior ruling by the same court found that the “plain smell” of cannabis is insufficient to indicate the presence of illegal substances due to the increasing legalization of certain cannabis products at both state and federal levels.
NORML board member Nikki Fried, who also chairs the Florida Democratic Party, praised the ruling, calling it “a tremendous win for criminal justice reform and cannabis legalization.”
This ruling aligns with decisions in states like Maryland, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania, where courts have found that marijuana odor alone does not justify warrantless vehicle searches. However, the Tennessee Supreme Court recently upheld the use of canine alerts for broader searches, even though dogs cannot distinguish between marijuana and hemp.
In a concurring opinion, Judge Jordan Pratt acknowledged the evolving legal landscape, stating, “Dogs trained to alert on cannabis can no longer provide the sole basis for a stop or search.” He added that future practices may rely on dogs trained to differentiate cannabis from other substances or on additional officer questioning to establish probable cause.
