Does warrantless use of a drug detection dog constitute an unreasonable search when the officer and dog are standing in the common area of a multiunit living space to detect the presence of drugs inside private living space?

QUESTION PRESENTED Since at least 1964, this Court has recognized that hotel guests are entitled to the same Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures as homeowners. Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483, 490 (1964). In 2013, this Court held that a police officer violates the Fourth Amendment when he conducts a dog sniff investigation on the front porch of a single-family home without first obtaining a warrant. Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1, 11 (2018). When Dewayne Lewis was a motel guest, police officers warrantlessly used a drug sniffing dog to investigate the contents of his room from a publicly-accessible hallway. Despite the outcome suggested by Stoner and Jardines, the Seventh Circuit held that the investigation did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights because Lewis was a motel guest and the hallway where the officer stood was accessible to the public. United States v. Lewis, 38 F.4th 527, 536 (7th Cir. 2022). The question presented is: Does warrantless use of a drug detection dog constitute an unreasonable search when the officer and dog are standing in the common area of a multiunit living space to detect the presence of drugs inside private living space? i