Sentences with phrase «of sniffer dogs»

The Supreme Court concluded by a 6 - to - 3 majority that the use of a sniffer dog in these circumstances constituted a search, and that the search constituted a breach of the suspect's rights under Section 8 of the Charter.

In fact, I'm putting my sense of smell to the test, and attempting to emulate the sensory skills of a sniffer dog.

As such, another interesting aspect of security that has seen a rise in recent years is the use of sniffer dogs within schools and colleges.

Animals on Trial The idea of canine testimony being accepted in court is not without precedent (e.g. drug smugglers who are convicted on the evidence of sniffer dogs), but what about the idea of putting an animal itself on trial?

It is important not to treat the capacity and accuracy of sniffer dogs as interchangeable.

Having defined the law enforcement mission of a traffic stop, Justice Ginsburg concluded that the use of a sniffer dog fell outside the mission and can not support delay in the absence of reasonable suspicion, slip.

The use of sniffer dogs engages section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure.

Dog trainer resume objective 1: a skilled and vastly experienced dog trainer looking for a position of a sniffer dog trainer in a organisation which is responsible for fighting crime so that I can use my special skills and my knowledge of dog training in a way which also helps to benefit the society.

One specific case that could be cited relative to the section 8 right involved police use of sniffer dogs to uncover illegal drugs.

The report recommends improving bird - and bat - death monitoring through the use of sniffer dogs, video cameras, and daily surveys.

In light of this ruling, police across Canada will undoubtedly make increased use of sniffer dogs to check the luggage of travellers, potentially leading to «false hits,» thereby inconveniencing and humiliating innocent individuals.

If there are no grounds of reasonable suspicion, the use of the sniffer dogs will violate the s. 8 reasonableness standard.

The Rodriguez rule may be more important for its impact on police asking questions than the use of sniffer dogs.

The majority, Justices Ellen I. Picard and Jack Watson, held at para. 7 that the lesser standard of reasonable grounds to suspect is constitutionally permissible based upon R. v. Chehil, [2013] 3 S.C.R. 220 where the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that the lower threshold respects the balance under s. 8 by permitting law enforcement to employ «legitimate but limited investigative techniques» such as the use of a sniffer dog.