Frost v. State (4th District Court of Appeals, January 26th, 2011)

A deputy stopped the Defendant's car for running a stop sign. The deputy asked if he could search the car.  When the Defendant said no the deputy called for a dog unit.  While writing the traffic citation, a Detective arrived at the scene with his dog.  The dog was walked around the car for to perform an exterior sniff. Rex, the dog, alerted at the driver's seat.   The Defendant was then removed from his car and a search turned up powder and crack cocainein an Altoids can found between the driver's seat and center console. A bag with marijuana was found in the same area.

The Fourth District was faced with two lines of cases.  It rejected one line of decisions that required the State to prove both proper training AND reliability of a drug dog to form probable cause.  Instead, "the state can make a prima facie showing of probable case based on a narcotic dog's alert by demonstrating that the dog has been properly trained and certified. If the defendant wishes to challenge the reliability of the dog, he can do so by using the performance records of the dog, or other evidence, such as expert testimony. Whether probable cause has been established will then be resolved by the trial court."

Notes: Now, once the State has shown proper training and certification of a dog the burden shifts to the Defendant to show a lack of reliability.