Asking defendant if he “had a moment” after he was walking back to his car at the end of the stop made the continuation of the stop consensual. United States v. Lopez-Rojo, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42679 (D. Nev. May 29, 2008)*:<\/p>\n
The uncontroverted facts developed at this court’s suppression hearings revealed that Lewis told Defendant he was receiving a warning, gave Defendant his driving documents, said goodbye, and shook Defendant’s hand. Defendant then started walking back to his vehicle, but before he entered the vehicle, Lewis asked Defendant if he had a moment. In response, Defendant walked back to Lewis. Lewis asked Defendant whether he had illegal drugs or a large amount of cash in his vehicle. Defendant responded that he did not have any drugs in his vehicle, but he did have about $ 1000 cash. Lewis then asked Defendant if the officers could search his vehicle. Defendant nodded, said yes, and thereafter signed a written consent to search.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Smell of a small quantity of marijuana is still probable cause to believe that more may be present. State v. Ortega<\/a>, 749 N.W.2d 851 (Minn. App. 2008):<\/p>\n
[E]ven a petty-misdemeanor amount of marijuana provides probable cause to issue a warrant to search for more marijuana. … The probable-cause standard is merely a test to determine objective constitutional reasonableness, and regardless of the quantity of marijuana observed, the presence of any amount logically suggests that there may be more. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Strong odor of marijuana was probable cause to search a vehicle. State v. Stone<\/a>, 2008 Ohio 2615, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 2189 (11th Dist. May 30, 2008).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading