Court Opinion

ID: 9875423
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 22:33:44.331166+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:00.832426
License: Public Domain

VandeWalle, Chief Justice,
concurring in the result.
[¶ 32] I concur in the result reached by the majority opinion. I agree with the statements in the majority opinion concerning what must be contained in the affidavit in support of the application for the search warrant. I also agree with statements concerning the need to set forth in the affidavit of the reliability of the drug dog if the affidavit relies on the dog’s positive indication for probable cause to issue the search warrant. Nevertheless, to the extent the majority opinion appears to conclude the search warrant is defective with respect to relying on the drug dog’s positive identification, in this particular instance I do not agree that it is defective. One need look only to ¶ 25 of the majority opinion for an explanation. It is apparent from the trial court’s decision that the trial court was aware of the qualifications of K9 Piko. Indeed it is worth noting that the dog is referred to by name, in the affidavit, not merely as a “drug sniffing dog.” While it is the information in the affidavit before the issuing magistrate and what the issuing magistrate knew about the dog that is significant, the issuing magistrate was one of the judges of “the Court” before which K9 Piko’s “qualifications have been put before the Court several times.”
[¶ 33] The affidavit in support of the search warrant should have contained at least minimum reference to the qualifications of the dog. It would have been a simple matter to do so. However, under these circumstances in which it is readily apparent that the officer seeking the warrant as well as the issuing magistrate were from past experience familiar with the reliability of K9 Piko, I conclude the affidavit and the search warrant are not defective for failure to state what was obvious to the officer, the issuing magistrate and the trial court from that experience with K9 Piko. The dog was reliable. Indeed, the positive indication by K9 Piko provides more substantive probable cause to issue the warrant than the other information in the affidavit upon which the majority relies, much of which involves speculation about seemingly innocent activity.
[¶ 34] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C. J.