The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that will decide if the use of drug-sniffing dogs after stopping a vehicle for routine traffic violations is a unreasonable search of the vehicle.

In the case, Illinois v. Caballes, Roy Caballes was stopped by police for driving six miles per hour over the speed limit. He was about to get off with a warning until another police officer showed up with a drug dog that alerted on $250,000 worth of marijuana in the trunk of the car.

The Illinois Supreme Court overturned Cabelles conviction because the judges ruled that the police had no reason to search his car. The state of Illinois appealed to the case to the Supreme Court. "A sniff is not a search," justices were told by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan.

Chicago attorney Ralph Meczyk, representing Cabelles, countered. "It is accusatory. It is profoundly embarrassing."

The Supreme Court has issued earlier rulings that found that drug dog use is not necessarily a search that falls under the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches or seizures.

Sources:
Supreme Court Hears Case on Drug-Sniffing Dogs' Role in Searches
Court Considers When Cops Can Use Canines