NCJ Number
168777
Journal
The Advocate Volume: 18 Issue: 1 Dated: (January 1996) Pages: 110-112
Editor(s)
E C Monahan,
E W Lewis
Date Published
1996
Length
3 pages
Annotation
The case described in this article is intended to serve as an example of the erosion of constitutional protections resulting from existing efforts to stop drug trafficking.
Abstract
In United States v. Hooper, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents justified the seizure of Hooper's bag because he came from a source city and fit the DEA's drug courier profile. Yet, the government conceded in oral arguments that a source city for drug trafficking was virtually any city with a major airport. With regard to the drug courier profile, several cases demonstrate the drug courier's "chameleon" way of adapting to any particular set of observations. Even assuming source city and drug courier profile elements raised the suspicion of government agents, facts of the case do not support the conclusion that DEA agents had a reasonable suspicion, let alone probable cause, to detain Hooper's suitcase. Other cases are cited to illustrate the weakness of arguments made in United States v. Hooper and the sometimes unfounded nature of aggressive law enforcement tactics.