close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Odor of marijuana and probable cause for vehicle search.

Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by Reyn, Aug 18, 2011.

  1. Reyn

    Reyn Times Up

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,424
    Likes Received:
    11
    Has it changed where an officer has to distinguish between burnt marijuana and raw marijuana when going into the trunk of a vehicle?
     
  2. glockurai

    glockurai

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    Messages:
    583
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    Not that I've heard of.
     

  3. RocPO

    RocPO

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    Messages:
    915
    Likes Received:
    20
    Location:
    Stacked up on your door
    No. Possession of marijuana is a crime as well.
     
  4. ctaggart

    ctaggart

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,507
    Likes Received:
    1
    What state are you in? Case law is going to dictate a lot of your search and seizure.
     
  5. merlynusn

    merlynusn

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Messages:
    4,119
    Likes Received:
    335
    Location:
    NC
    If I smell marijuana that has been burned. It still gives me PC to believe evidence of a crime may be in the vehicle. Therefore, I can get into the trunk as well. I'm in NC.
     
  6. 4949shooter

    4949shooter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    9,928
    Likes Received:
    521
    Location:
    New Jersey Republik
    It hasn't changed. Odor of burnt will get you the entire vehicle. Unless there is case law in your state that says otherwise.

    Here in NJ, we are obtaining consents or search warrants in order to search a vehicle based on the probable cause resulting from odor of marijuana. But that's our state, and a few others.

    Though I am not sure if all agencies are on board with this yet.
     
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2011
  7. ray9898

    ray9898

    Joined:
    May 29, 2001
    Messages:
    14,602
    Likes Received:
    1,969
    Location:
    Georgia
    The whole shebang.
     
  8. phuzz01

    phuzz01

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    The one case that I am aware of that contradicts the rest of the country is Massachusetts. They have made possession of small amounts of marijuana a civil infraction, not a crime. So, there is new MA Supreme Court case law stating that odor of burnt marijuana alone is no longer probable cause that a crime was committed. In fact, not only did they rule that it is not probable cause to search, they ruled that it was not sufficient to order the driver or passengers to exit the vehicle.
     
  9. Big House

    Big House Biggest member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    They can't be charge with DWI/DUI?
     
  10. DaBigBR

    DaBigBR No Infidels!

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    8,798
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Circling the wagons.
    I can kinda see what they were driving at saying that it's not PC that a crime was committed (doesn't mean I agree), but the last part's nutty...flies in the face of established law that does not require any reason to order the occupants to exit the vehicle.

    Not very successfully based merely upon the presence of an odor.
     
  11. Reyn

    Reyn Times Up

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,424
    Likes Received:
    11
  12. RetailNinja

    RetailNinja

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    1,229
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Tuktoyaktuk

    Apparently judges in MA smoke weed...
     
  13. Big House

    Big House Biggest member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    With the odor usually associated as marijuana, burnt or otherwise, this is not enough to establish cause to test at roadside? WTH is that state doing to protect its citizens? :dunno:
     
  14. MeefZah

    MeefZah Cover is Code 3

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,154
    Likes Received:
    595
    Location:
    Lost Coast, Cali
    Vehicle exception doesn't apply?

    If they refuse consent do you stand at the window for a few hours waiting on someone else to get the warrant? how do you justify the length of detention? I'm confused...
     
  15. DaBigBR

    DaBigBR No Infidels!

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    8,798
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Circling the wagons.
    Yes, it most likely does, but the issue here is the ability to search the car. After the person is (presumably) arrested for driving/operating while/under impaired/intoxicated/the influence (whatever they call it there), then I would think that you should still get the car under Belton/Gant, but that would be the next test case for them, I suppose.

    Indeed that is how it works in places that do not recognize Carroll. The length of detention is justified the same way it would be if you were holding a residence to get a search warrant.
     
  16. 4949shooter

    4949shooter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    9,928
    Likes Received:
    521
    Location:
    New Jersey Republik
    DaBigBR nailed it. Unfortunately, here in the Peoples' Republik, the courts do not hold there to be exigency on a motor vehicle stop. In other words, they say we have the time to get a warrant. The only way around this is through a consent search.

    State of NJ vs. Juan Pena Flores set the stage for this.

    State of NJ vs. Charles Fuller anchored it.
     
  17. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    20,630
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    And apparently "Its just weed, man" is established case law... :rofl:

    Randy
     
  18. MeefZah

    MeefZah Cover is Code 3

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,154
    Likes Received:
    595
    Location:
    Lost Coast, Cali
    That is insane.

    If I smell weed I am getting in the car, period, right now, no warrant needed.

    I had no idea that wasn't a nationwide thing.
     
  19. phuzz01

    phuzz01

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    It flies in the face of established FEDERAL law. However, individual states can interpret their own constitutions to grant rights and protections beyond what is afforded by federal law. Many states have interpreted their constitutions to put additional restrictions on law enforcement during investigatory detentions or warantless searches. In the MA case, the MA Supreme Court has decided that the police need reasonable suspicion of a crime (as opposed to a mere civil infraction) to order someone to exit the vehicle. If the police had indicators that the driver was impaired, that would be sufficient. However, the mere odor of burnt marijuana alone (especially with multiple occupants) is not reasonable suspicion that the driver is impaired.
     
  20. 4949shooter

    4949shooter

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    9,928
    Likes Received:
    521
    Location:
    New Jersey Republik
    Unfortunately, it is not any more.