{"id":10540,"date":"2014-03-20T16:17:54","date_gmt":"2014-03-14T23:33:15","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2014-04-30T05:51:43","modified_gmt":"2014-04-30T10:51:43","slug":"en-us-42","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=10540","title":{"rendered":"Cal.1: Smell of MJ in a car in California is PC despite MMJ and that a small quantity is only an infraction"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The smell of marijuana coming from a car is probable cause to search it in California, notwithstanding the fact California recognizes medical marijuana and that a small quantity is an infraction. There does not have to be probable cause to believe there is more than 28.5 grams in the car. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.courts.ca.gov\/opinions\/documents\/A137796.PDF\">People v. Waxler<\/a>, 224 Cal. App. 4th 712, 168 Cal. Rptr. 3d 822 (1st Dist. 2014):<br \/>\n<!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The question in this case is whether the odor of burnt marijuana emanating from a vehicle and the observation of burnt marijuana in a pipe inside the vehicle create probable cause to search that vehicle pursuant to the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. The answer is yes, notwithstanding the fact that possession of not more than 28.5 grams (an ounce) \u201cof marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, is \u2026 an infraction\u201d punishable by a fine. (Health &amp; Saf. Code, \u00a7 11357, subd. (b).) Under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, a law enforcement officer may search a vehicle when he or she has probable cause to believe  it contains contraband or evidence of a crime. (Robey v. Superior Court (2013) 56 Cal.4th 1218, 1225 [158 Cal. Rptr. 3d 261, 302 P.3d 574] (Robey).) Under the current state of California law, nonmedical marijuana\u2014even in amounts within the statutory limit set forth in section 11357, subdivision (b)\u2014is \u201ccontraband\u201d and may provide probable cause to search a vehicle under the automobile exception. Moreover, possession of a \u201c215 card\u201d does not vitiate probable cause to search pursuant to the automobile exception. (People v. Strasburg (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 1052 [56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 306] (Strasburg).)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=10540\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10540","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10540","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=10540"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10540\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11344,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10540\/revisions\/11344"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=10540"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=10540"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=10540"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}