In the court's view, an officer's 'founded' or 'articulable' suspicion provided adequate fourth amendment protection, because the intrusion of the sniff search was minimal. However, implicit in the court's reasoning is the notion that an innocent person's expectation of privacy should be accorded greater respect than that of guilty persons. This contrasts with the Supreme Court's view that constitutional guarantees lose meaning if they protect only persons thought to be innocent. The Ninth Circuit also ignored Supreme Court precedent requiring that warrantless searches be supported by probable cause. The Supreme Court has made exceptions only for cases where the suspicion is that the suspect is armed and where the search is at the Nation's border. Probable cause provides a clearer standard than articulable suspicion. A total of 173 footnotes are provided.