Sit, Stay, Overturn: How New Canine Science Is Challenging Courtroom Convictions

Authors

• Kerolls Gadelrab

Document Type

Notes

Abstract

Courts increasingly rely on cadaver dog evidence in criminal trials, treating canine alerts as a reliable form of forensic evidence. This naive acceptance of cadaver dog evidence, coupled with courts’ continued application of out-dated admissibility standards, threatens to perpetuate wrongful convictions in an era of rapidly advancing scientific understanding. This Article argues that courts must develop a new framework for evaluating cadaver dog evidence that incorporates modern scientific research on ca-nine olfaction and scent detection capabilities. While scholars have extensively analyzed various forensic evidence standards post-Daubert, the literature has largely over-looked how recent scientific advances in understanding ca-nine olfaction should reshape the legal framework for admitting cadaver dog evidence. The existing scholarship fails to reconcile the tension between traditional admissibility standards and our evolving scientific knowledge of how dogs detect and process scent.

This Article proposes a novel three-part test that builds upon existing Frye-Plus and Florida v. Harris standards while incorporating current scientific understanding of canine olfaction. By examining recent developments in canine science through the lens of evidence law, this Article provides a unique comprehensive framework for aligning legal standards with scientific reality in the evaluation of cadaver dog evidence.

Recommended Citation

Gadelrab, Kerolls (2026) "Sit, Stay, Overturn: How New Canine Science Is Challenging Courtroom Convictions," Georgia Criminal Law Review: Vol. 4: No. 2, Article 5.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/gclr/vol4/iss2/5