NO!
A police officer needs reasonable suspicion. That means that they must have articulable facts that when presented in the totality of the circumstances a person would reasonable believe that a crime was or will be committed.
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not violated when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous." (392 U.S. 1, at 30.)
For their own protection, police may perform a quick surface search of the person's outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed. This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not merely upon an officer's hunch. This permitted police action has subsequently been referred to in short as a "stop and frisk," or simply a "Terry stop". The Terrystandard was later extended to temporary detentions of persons in vehicles, known as traffic stops.
The rationale behind the Supreme Court decision revolves around the understanding that, as the opinion notes, "the exclusionary rule has its limitations." The meaning of the rule is to protect persons from unreasonable searches and seizures aimed atgathering evidence, not searches and seizures for other purposes (like prevention of crime or personal protection of police officers).
Under no circumstances can a police officer stop you or search you without probable cause. Probable cause is one of the ways that an ordinary citizen's right to privacy is protected from unlawful search and seizure.
Once a properly trained working K9 indicates something illegal on you or your property, that is considered probable cause.
As with any other vehicle, it'll require probable cause. If a police officer sees a lot lizard go into your truck, for example, then they have probable cause to search that vehicle.
Canines are not technically "searching" you, they are "screening" you. If they "hit" on you that gives the officer reasonable probable cause that you may have contraband on your person, and HE can then search you.
A police officer in the United States can only physically search your car with a warrant or probable cause, such as seeing a weapon, open container or drug paraphernalia through a window.
no, they need your permission unless they have probable cause
If they have probable cause.
The Probable Clause is a part of the 4th Amendment, and it says that the government cannot search a prson, or ask for a search warrant without probable suspition
Probable cause.
With the proper warrant or probable cause, a cell phone could certainly be searched. More commonly the police would obtain necessary records from the cellular service provider.
In general, police can search your trunk without a warrant or probable cause if they have your consent or if they believe there is evidence of a crime in the trunk.
The whole house. If he smells marijuana, he has reasonable suspicion. As the supervising officer of a probee, he has police authority. With this he can conduct the search. If he finds anything in the search (be it a single seed) he has probable cause and can take the probee into custody. He can additionally hold any other persons in the house for law enforcement and affect arrest when they arrive. Don't poke the bear!