M.D.Fla.: Fact no MJ was found despite car strongly smelling of it doesn’t mean officer wasn’t credible

The fact a car smells of marijuana but none was found doesn’t mean the officer wasn’t credible. United States v. Wardlow, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148359 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 20, 2024):

And perhaps more significantly, the Court finds that Deputy Matera testified credibly that he detected the strong and overwhelming odor of marijuana when he was within the close range of the vehicle during his conversation with Defendant. Upon first blush, the fact that no marijuana was found in the vehicle may seem suspect, but upon further consideration, the lack of physical evidence is not necessarily surprising. The Court is aware of certain practices such as “hotboxing,” where people choose to smoke marijuana in closed spaces, like vehicles, for the purpose of repeatedly inhaling secondhand smoke. If something like that had taken place here, and the individual fully smoked all the marijuana and discarded whatever paraphernalia he was using to consume it, the fact that no physical evidence of marijuana was found in the vehicle would not be inconsistent with Deputy Matera’s testimony.

This entry was posted in Plain view, feel, smell. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.