The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Floyd, 928 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1991):
Appellants also argue that the sniffs were illegal because they took place out of the owner's presence, without the owner's knowledge, and without any exigencies. These conditions are not prerequisites to a valid canine sniff. See United States v. DiCesare, 765 F.2d 890, 897 (9th Cir.), amended, 777 F.2d 543 (9th Cir.1985) (the canine sniff of a parked car's trunk is "not a 'search' requiring probable cause").
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.