Cory James Jordan v. State, 394 S.W.3d 58

Jord an was convicted of misdemeanor possession of marijuana with 180 days confinement probated for 18 months and a $100 fine.
At about 3:21 a.m. on March 14, 2010, Deputies Upton and Lacy were parked in marked patrol cars in a cul-de-sac.
Both deputies observed Jord an’s car approach, go down a gravel path to a gated area, then back into the cul-de-sac.
The officers walked toward the car as Jord an rolled down the driver’s window; one officer smelled burned marijuana.
The officers conducted a search with consent after Jord an rolled down the window and they detected the odor, finding marijuana in Jord an’s pocket and in the car.
Jordan moved to suppress the evidence, arguing the initial contact was a detention; the trial court denied the motion and the court of appeals affirmed the denial and the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the initial contact a detention requiring suspicion?	Jordan asserts detention without reasonable suspicion.	State contends it was a consensual encounter.	Encounter deemed consensual; no detention/suspicion required.
Did the officers’ conduct transform the encounter into a detention?	Jordan argues show of authority converted the encounter to a seizure.	State maintains lack of coercive show allowed consensual contact.	No seizure; still a consensual encounter.
Was there probable cause to search Jordan’s person based on odor of marijuana?	Jordan contends odor from vehicle does not justify search of person.	State relies on odor in a confined space to establish probable cause to search person and car.	Odor from vehicle provided probable cause to search vehicle and occupants.
Is the evidence legally sufficient given the commingling of marijuana from pocket and car?	Jordan challenges admission of combined marijuana as unusable for charge.	Recovered marijuana from both locations was lawfully obtained.	Sufficiency upheld; commingling does not defeat proof.

State v. Woodard, 341 S.W.3d 404 (Tex. 2011) (consensual encounter analysis for initial police contact)
Griffin v. Crain, 332 S.W.3d 460 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (show of authority vs. voluntary cooperation in encounters)
Crain v. State, 315 S.W.3d 43 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (distinguishing consensual encounters from detentions)
Garcia–Cantu v. State, 253 S.W.3d 236 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (limits on how police may restrain or approach a suspect without warrant)
Parker v. State, 206 S.W.3d 593 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (odor of marijuana in small, enclosed space supports probable cause)