Marijuana smoke odor in car not enough for police action?

[JonLP24]

(Reuters) - The smell of marijuana smoke is no longer enough reason for police to order someone out of a car, now that pot has been decriminalized in Massachusetts, the state's highest court said in a decision published on Tuesday.

The ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was in response to an appeal filed by lawyers for Benjamin Cruz from Boston, whom police ordered out of a car in 2009 when they approached the vehicle parked in front of a fire hydrant and smelled marijuana.

<snip>

"Without at least some other additional fact to bolster a reasonable suspicion of actual criminal activity, the odor of burned marijuana alone cannot reasonably provide suspicion of criminal activity to justify an exit order," the opinion said.

In a dissenting opinion, now retired Justice Judith Cowin wrote, "Even though possession of a small amount of marijuana is now no longer criminal, it may serve as the basis for a reasonable suspicion that activities involving marijuana, that are indeed criminal, are underway."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/20/us-marijuana-car-idUSTRE73J2HI20110420?feedType=RSS&feedName=oddlyEnoughNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reuters%2FoddlyEnoughNews+%28News+%2F+US+%2F+Oddly+Enough%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

[MadHound]

1. Good, nice to see that we're becoming less authoritarian in regards to pot.

After all, there are several substances that can mimic the smell of pot.

[DCKit]

2. Less in MA maybe, far more in other places. nt

[meegbear]

3. What was snipped out ...

The high court said a key factor in its decision was the 2008 change in state law which made possession of one ounce or less of marijuana a civil rather than a criminal offense. (emphasis -- meegbear)

Since it's a civil offense, it should be treated as such.

[JonLP24]

10. I tried to get both of the opinions in there

as well as limiting it to 4 paragraphs. First paragraph says it was decriminalized which is why I snipped that part out. Would of loved to included more though.

[nomb]

4. Really should read - Civil violation not enough to justify Criminal search

Although a bit counter-intuitive given the headline, it does make sense logically ... and rationally.


By the same token it prevents a search after jay-walking or a parking violation. (I believe)

[WatsonT]

5. Well that is certainly an objective standard

certainly no way this can be abused.

[Le Taz Hot]

6. Goddess! You mean the good guys

actually won one? I don't remember the last time that actually happened.

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. I am sure it is temporary until some outraged Republican finds out about it.

[Le Taz Hot]

9. Or Obama.

Btw, just noticed your sig. line. I LOVE Tom Waits. "Chocolate Jesus" is just the best.

[lame54]

8. that smell might come from their uniforms