Confidential informant tip and dog sniff
Gawd! . . . If you ever hear these two phrases in the same paragraph the result certainly can’t be good . . . .
Defendant was convicted in federal district court of possession with intent to distribute. Defendant’s vehicle was stopped. A confidential informant’s tip was the basis for the police conducting a dog sniff. Defendant brought a motion to suppress, which was denied. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the search concluding that the confidential informant’s tip provided reasonable suspicion for the dog sniff, and that the traffic stop was not impermissibly extended. Affirmed.
United States v. Harry, 18-2221, appealed from the Northern District of Iowa, Smith, J.
Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.