Investigative Detention / Hindering / Timeframe Allowed While Waiting for K9

episode

Street Cop Podcast not yet transcribed

▲ 0

Transcript

This episode hasn't been transcribed yet Upvotes decide what gets transcribed next — 0 so far. Sign in to upvote

More from Street Cop Podcast

Episode 1027: From Tragedy to Resiliency - Susan Snow’s Journey 57 min · 01 Sep 2026

Episode 1026: Inside the Future of Police Off-Duty Management with Augustus Hellwich 38 min · 09 Jul 2026

All episodes from Street Cop Podcast →

Report any issue

Source

Recorded10 Sep 2021

Publisheranchor.fm ↗

Handlerec:531580

Show notes

In this episode, Dennis explores the topic of investigative detention, hindering, and the timeframe allowed while waiting for an available K9 Unit. Recorded on 10/12/2017. The courts have upheld investigative detentions of: 45 Minutes – United States v Davies 1985 https://www.leagle.com/decision/19851661768f2d89311515?fbclid=IwAR1yrWu5W7atkaHg_KTcrT7Ek05PXB4fj4YmepPA2UiiMJ4uU0eoaBzN4H4 (https://www.leagle.com/decision/19851661768f2d89311515) 50 Minutes – US v. Alpert 1987 https://www.leagle.com/decision/19871774816f2d95811624?fbclid=IwAR2CpcPPIWcfvc7L0fKTCU4vhJuuNuyo920DtSizrYuNTl103EUbeNg8Kf0 (https://www.leagle.com/decision/19871774816f2d95811624) 60 Minutes – US v. Large 1984 https://www.leagle.com/decision/19841365729f2d63611269?fbclid=IwAR3yiAMskxn5y89lKy6ndpsOYfYKXFS6ybxPHXtCR-zFDPuGSgUulw---bU (https://www.leagle.com/decision/19841365729f2d63611269) 75 Minutes – US v. Borys 1985 https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-borys-2?fbclid=IwAR1OmEIeTyBnYaikm0jJZUnycAtfCwWhprYIamoPK1_AqbBhyi8g7vxyykY (https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-borys-2) Each of these cases cited involved delays necessitated by efforts to obtain a narcotics dog for sniffing luggage or packages. The court will look at whether or not the police diligently pursued their investigation, and whether the detention lasts no longer than is necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop. The circumstances surrounding the case will matter too, namely the use of handcuffs and confinement. U.S. v. Sharpe (1985) 20 Minute or Longer detentions do not constitute a violation of the 4th Amendment! In Sharpe the Court refused to adopt a time limit. State v Davis (1986) – NJ Courts adopt Sharpe and state – “Officers should use the least instrusive investigative techniques reasonably available to verify or dispel his suspicion in the shortest period of time reasonably possible” https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Flaw.justia.com%2Fcases%2Fnew-jersey%2Fsupreme-court%2F1986%2F104-n-j-490-0.html%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR1Aazl3ZObZOZm5-e8v7-9nJiJq9T3jCn0JKzu0mM4kyvFh9G64s7aq0Voandh=AT2SHE_DVb0uYXJqzoOSHxaXeLIgi-d4RcDVxJKmKKlWYEo5oUCDKAHNZAtfQnZwPWY5VRpZQcv5Uf9mWadOgkdx176569Jlz1S61_QYRpUpgr1UXDS72x9r9Y0Lm26qgDtfXmRaaaBJHePlSAand__tn__=-UK-R (http://law.justia.com/.../supreme.../1986/104-n-j-490-0.html) Also discussed in State v Dickey (1998) https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fcaselaw.findlaw.com%2Fnj-supreme-court%2F1456380.html%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR3gxkLJEHIOMZW2hS9KwyXwdEKK9wg2DOH5A2qQu8rQR0s2WCab0oVIqigandh=AT1fWLeapRnbwSRg2OBcU1bKJze71_iyVjTv7J5ovl76EgjthkyhIa9ppt7Z90XZkDbZoOJX1qgSAR93vu2IjbwQ3ndaOxT2aG2aiNsJbn0nmOuU-lPBIqDi-JLvT63j2QGJivNWB-enZhyHUQand__tn__=-UK-R (http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-supreme-court/1456380.html) Also see State v. Colapinto 1998 regarding the detention of 25 minutes while waiting for a DWI officer. UNITED STATES v. SHARPE | FindLaw STATE v. COLAPINTO | FindLaw

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.