MS: No passenger standing in car despite well-secreted drugs

Defendant argued he had standing in a car because he was more than a mere passenger because of how the drugs were hidden and “because ‘[h]e had access to parts of the car that were not normally accessible to a regular passenger,’ i.e., the area behind the glove compartment. We disagree. We decline to draw a constitutional distinction based on whether drugs are hidden in or behind a car’s glove compartment.” Holloway v. State, 2019 Miss. App. LEXIS 301 (June 25, 2019). [But doesn’t that show more “control” of the vehicle? Still, what about property concepts?]

Calling for backup after smelling marijuana in a car doesn’t unreasonably prolong the stop because probable cause has been established. Hill v. State, 2019 Ga. App. LEXIS 391 (June 25, 2019).*