we are not bound by the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of the Fourth Amendment when determining the seope of state constitutional protections."); see also People v. Mason, 989 P.2d 757, 759 (Colo.1999)("IWle have afforded suspects in Colorado greater rights than are available under the federal Constitution."); People v. Young, 814 P.2d 834, 842-43 (Colo.1991)("We have recognized and exercised our independent role on a number of occasions and on several have determined that the Colorado Constitution provides more protection for our citizens than do similarly or identically worded provisions of the United States Constitution."). In some instances, we have determined certain investigative activities to be searches, even though the United States Supreme Court de 6)(<HOLDING>); see also People v. Redinger, 906 P.2d 81,
holding that a dog sniff of an express mail package was a search holding that a dog sniff of a federal express package was a search holding that a drugdetection dog sniff outside a garage door at a home was not a search under the fourth amendment holding a dog sniff outside the defendants front door was not a fourth amendment search holding that a dog sniff search of a safe taken by a burglar from the defendants home was a search