In a recent case (Rodriguez v. United States), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police may not extend traffic stops for drug-sniffing dogs to search stopped vehicles.In this case, a vehicle was stopped for riding on the shoulder of a Nebraska highway.  The driver was issued a written warning, which completed the stop. But the issuing officer then prolonged the stop and instructed his K-9 to circle the vehicle in search of drugs.

According to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, this "violates the Constitution’s shield against unreasonable seizures.”  This ruling will undoubtedly change the way traffic stops are conducted.  What do you think about it?  Should those who were previously convicted on other charges stemming from similar stops be allowed to appeal their convictions?