With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". conduct did not violate the Fourth Amendment.'" Id., ¶ 33 (citing United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 918 (1984)). The exception encompasses situations in which "police officers act in objectively reasonable reliance upon [a search] warrant, which ha[s] been issued by a detached and neutral magistrate." State v. Eason, 2001 WI 98, ¶ 74, 245 Wis. 2d 206, 629 N.W.2d 625. "[T]he burden is upon the State to show that the process used in obtaining the search warrant included a significant investigation and a review by either a police officer trained and knowledgeable in the requirements of probable cause and reasonable suspicion, or a knowledgeable government attorney." Id. ¶ 16. The search warrant in this case was signed by a Milwaukee County Court Commissioner, and t 1007 (Md. 2004) (<HOLDING>); Porter v. State of Texas, 93 S.W.3d 342,

A: holding a dog sniff outside the defendants front door was not a fourth amendment search
B: holding that a dog sniff outside the defendants door in his apartment building was not a search within the meaning of the fourth amendment so long as the police were lawfully present in the hallway when the search occurred
C: holding that a drugdetection dog sniff outside a garage door at a home was not a search under the fourth amendment
D: holding that a dog sniff of an apartment door from a common area is a permissible nonsearch under the fourth amendment
D.