Commonwealth v. Overmyer, 469 Mass. 16

Two Pittsfield officers responded to a motor vehicle collision involving the defendant on May 19, 2012, and noticed a very strong odor of unburnt marijuana near the Volvo.
The defendant provided the keys to the glove compartment, and officers retrieved a large bag of marijuana from the glove box.
After the bag was retrieved, officers allegedly perceived a strong odor of marijuana and believed more marijuana remained in the vehicle.
A backpack on the back seat contained two large freezer bags of marijuana; the defendant was later arrested and charged with possession with intent to distribute and related offenses.
The district court suppressed the bags in the backpack and the defendant’s statements, ruling that any further search lacked reasonable suspicion after the initial bag was seized.
The Commonwealth sought interlocutory relief; the single justice allowed the appeal and the case was transferred to the Supreme Judicial Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does odor of unburnt marijuana establish probable cause for search?	Overmyer argues odor plus circumstances support probable cause under the automobile exception.	Overmyer contends odor alone cannot establish probable cause after Cruz and related cases.	Odor alone does not establish probable cause for a warrantless search.
Was there probable cause to arrest based on the marijuana seized from the glove compartment?	Seizure of the fat bag and odor suggest more marijuana in the vehicle, supporting arrest.	Probable cause to arrest not shown without reliable weight and context.	Remanded to determine whether probable cause to arrest existed based on the glove-compartment marijuana.

Commonwealth v. Cruz, 459 Mass. 459 (Mass. 2011) (odor of burnt marijuana no longer proves criminality post-initiative)
Commonwealth v. Daniel, 464 Mass. 746 (Mass. 2013) (probable cause must be specific; weight matters for marijuana in vehicle)
Commonwealth v. Motta, 424 Mass. 117 (Mass. 1997) (automobile exception framework and probable cause standard)
Commonwealth v. Pacheco, 464 Mass. 768 (Mass. 2013) (presence of under an ounce of marijuana in vehicle not enough for search)
Commonwealth v. Jackson, 464 Mass. 758 (Mass. 2013) (observed marijuana on person not enough for probable cause to search)
Commonwealth v. Antobenedetto, 366 Mass. 51 (Mass. 1974) (probable cause requires data reliability; odor alone insufficient)
Commonwealth v. MacDonald, 459 Mass. 148 (Mass. 2011) (odor interpretation and weight of marijuana questioned)
Commonwealth v. Perkins, 465 Mass. 600 (Mass. 2013) (arrest incident searches and vehicle context)
Commonwealth v. LaPlante, 416 Mass. 433 (Mass. 1993) (foundation requirements for canine tracking evidence reliability)
Commonwealth v. Taylor, 426 Mass. 189 (Mass. 1997) (reliability prerequisites for canine alerts)