# Commonwealth v. Martin

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · June 8, 1993 · 534 Pa. 136

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9637219

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. William R. MARTIN, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** June 8, 1993
- **Citations:** 534 Pa. 136; 626 A.2d 556; 1993 Pa. LEXIS 142
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Papadakos
- **Judges:** Nix, C.J., and Larsen, Flaherty, Zappala, Papadakos, Cappy and Montemuro
- **Cited by:** 42 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9637219

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the use of a drug detection dog to sniff a person requires that police both be "lawfully in place at the time of the search [and] have probable cause to believe that a canine search of a person will produce contraband or evidence of a crime"
- explaining that, “although privacy may relate both to property and to one’s person, an invasion of one’s person is, in the usual case, [a] more severe intrusion on one’s privacy interest than an invasion of one’s property”
- holding, inter alia, that Article I, Section 8 authorizes canine sniff search of person only when police have probable cause to believe that such search will produce contraband or evidence of crime
- observing that “the State has a compelling interest to suppress illicit drug traffic”
- holding that, under enhanced privacy protections of Article I, Section 8, a canine sniff of a person is a search and requires probable cause and a search warrant

## Opinion text

*149 PAPADAKOS, Justice,
dissenting.
Since it is clear to me that a satchel is a “thing” and not a “person” and I will not paraphrase the law of realty (that anything attached to realty is realty) so that the sniff law will read that anything attached to the person is person, I join in the dissent authored so ably by Mr. Justice Montemuro.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9637219. Public record. Not legal advice.