E.D.Mich.: Defense can’t get “activity logs” of officers for 60 days prior to his stop to see if they also smelled MJ then; what would it prove?

Defendant filed a motion to suppress and a motion to produce the “activity logs” of the officers involved for the 60 days prior to his stop. He wants to see whether the officers claimed to have smelled marijuana during those stops, too. Denied: “Simply put, West has not yet identified evidence that could support a finding that the requested activity logs reflect repeated detections of marijuana odor by Officers Carter and Carson such that the impeachment value of the logs would ‘alter the quantum of proof’ at the upcoming suppression hearing. Lykins, 428 Fed. App’x at 624. In West’s own words, there is a ‘possibility’ that the logs reflect false or numerous marijuana detections by Officers Carter and Carson. … But a mere ‘possibility’ is not enough to warrant disclosure under Rule 16.” United States v. West, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41865 (E.D. Mich. March 23, 2017). [What would it really prove? Try talking to a client in your office who says the police smelled marijuana in his car. Often the client smells of marijuana because, if a regular smoker, they can’t even smell it on themselves, let alone in their own car. Just an observation …]