You are on page 1of 2

Arianna Garcia

United States v. Sololow
period. 1/2
5/19/14
United States v. Sokolow


Andrew Sokolow was stopped by Drug Enforcement Administration agents in a
International airport. The DEA found 1,063 grams of cocaine in Sokolows carry-on
luggage. The DEA agents knew that Sokolow paid $2,100 for two airline tickets from a
large roll of $20 bills, he traveled under a name that didn't match the telephone number
that he listed; he appeared nervous during his trip; and his luggage was not checked
before the flight.

The legal question, did the DEA agents have a reasonable suspicion, as needed
under Terry v. Ohio, that respondent was engaged in a wrongdoing when they
encountered him on the sidewalk? There was no probable cause for a search of the
luggage that Sokolow carried onto the plane. The DEA agents accused Sokolow of
being suspicious and decided to search his bags and bring dogs into the equation as
well.

Sokolow arrived at the International airport and proceeded into the plane. During the
check in process and flight, DEA agents knew information about him, knowing that he
checked in with a name that didn't belong to him, he had large amounts of money on
him, his carry-on luggage wasnt checked and that he wa accompanied with a woman
that was also going by a name that wasnt hers Officer mcCarthy determined that the
telephone number respondent gave to purchase the tickets was subscribed to a “Karl
Herman”. Officers noticed that andrew appeared to be nervous and looking all around
the waiting area the day that he arrived in Los Angeles. The DEA officers took andrew
by the arm and moved him back into the sidewalk, Kempshall asked respondent for his
airline identification; respondent claimed that he no longer had it. He told the DEA
agents that his name was Sokolow but he was traveling with his mothers maiden name
“Kray”. Both Andrew and the woman that he was with, Norian, were taken to the DEA
office and the airport. Both Norian and Andrews carry-on luggage were searched by a
narcotics detector dog. The dog found illegal documents that showed illegal drug trade
in Andrews shoulder bag. The dog didn't find any drugs in the shoulder bag.

Sokolows fourth amendment right was neglected because the DEA agents had no
right to approach Sokolow as they did on the sidewalk. The search dog was another
violation because they had no search warrant on him and had no reason to search his
bag, other than assuming that there was criminal action taking place. Even though they
did find an illegal document that involved drug trade, there was no evidence that gave
the DEA officers to search his bag in the first place.