IL4: Despite legalization of possession of small amounts of MJ, dog alert still PC

The drug dog’s “positive alert on the vehicle in this case established a fair probability that drugs or evidence of a crime would be found in the vehicle. This is true despite recent changes in the law regarding the legalization of small amounts of cannabis as ‘there are still, among other things, (1) illegal ways to transport it, (2) illegal places to consume it, and (3) illegal amounts of it to possess.’ Molina, 2022 IL App (4th) 220152, ¶ 43.” People v. Mallery, 2023 IL App (4th) 220528, 2023 Ill. App. LEXIS 132 (Apr. 25, 2023).

Handcuffing defendant here was merely a detention to “control the evolving scene” and not an arrest. The odor of marijuana justified the vehicle search. Womack v. State, 2023 Del. LEXIS 132 (Apr. 24, 2023).*

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging a search that was arguably illegal but irrelevant to the issuance of a search warrant. Huskisson v. United States, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70631 (S.D. Ind. Apr. 21, 2023).*

The officer’s mistake of law about the two working taillight statute v. city ordinance was reasonable. United States v. Nathanial, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70812 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 24, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Dog sniff, Probable cause, Reasonableness, Seizure. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.