State v. Steven Clay Anderson
154 Idaho 703
| Idaho | 2012Background
- Cassia County deputy stopped Anderson for an erratic late-night drive; van used fictitious plates, was unregistered, and lacked insurance.
- Anderson claimed the van belonged to his brother and that he had removed plates from his own car; Bernad confirmed plates matched a different vehicle.
- Officer observed furtive movements and Anderson’s failure to keep hands visible, plus pending controlled-substance charges.
- Drug dog alerted on the passenger-side door; dog later failed to alert when inside the van.
- Citations were issued; officers conducted a search leading to the discovery of a rifle; Anderson moved to suppress the evidence.
- District court denied the motion to suppress; Court of Appeals affirmed; Idaho Supreme Court granted review and affirmed the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether probable cause dissipates when a drug dog fails to alert inside the vehicle | Anderson: dissipates upon failure | State: totality of circumstances sustains probable cause | Probable cause did not dissipate; initial alert plus circumstances justified the search. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Tucker, 132 Idaho 841 (1999) (drug dog alert supports probable cause for interior search)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (probable cause may authorize search of vehicle areas where evidence might be found)
- United States v. Grubbs, 547 U.S. 90 (2006) (probable cause may persist when new information adjusts likelihood)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982) (scope of probable-cause search of vehicle)
- United States v. Ortiz–Hernandez, 427 F.3d 567 (9th Cir. 2005) (probable-cause dissipations considered under totality of circumstances)