50 Cal.App.5th 620
Cal. Ct. App.2020Background
- Officers approached a parked car with missing registration tag; defendant exited, resisted, and was arrested and placed in a patrol car.
- After the arrest, Officer Clark approached the vehicle, smelled marijuana, and opened the center console.
- Officer Clark found a knotted plastic baggie containing about two grams of marijuana in the center console.
- After finding the baggie, officers conducted a probable-cause search and discovered a loaded handgun behind a rear panel.
- Defendant’s motions to suppress were denied by the magistrate and trial court; defendant pled no contest to being a felon in possession of a firearm and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the odor of marijuana plus a knotted baggie (~2 g) in plain view created probable cause to search the vehicle | Odor and visible baggie (argued as an "open container" or unlawful possession) gave probable cause to search for additional contraband | Prop 64 permits lawful possession up to 28.5 g; knotted baggie was not an open container; odor alone insufficient | No probable cause. Prop 64 (§ 11362.1(c)) applies; knotted baggie not an "open container;" odor + small amount did not establish a fair probability of other contraband. Search violated the Fourth Amendment. |
| Whether the search was permissible as an inventory search or a search incident to arrest | (People did not press inventory or SITA on appeal) | Search was not an inventory (no policy evidence) and SITA inapplicable because defendant was secured in patrol car and not within reaching distance | Court agreed: not an inventory search and not lawful as a search incident to arrest (citing Arizona v. Gant). |
| Whether the good-faith exception saves the evidence | Officers relied on preexisting appellate precedent (Waxler/Strasburg/Fews); suppression would deter conscientious policing | (Defendant did not meaningfully respond) | Rejected. Good-faith exception inapplicable because Prop 64 was in effect before the search; no binding precedent specifically authorizing the search; People failed to meet burden. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Waxler, 224 Cal.App.4th 712 (2014) (pre-Prop 64: any amount of marijuana in a vehicle supported probable cause to search)
- People v. Strasburg, 148 Cal.App.4th 1052 (2007) (officer’s detection of marijuana odor supported probable cause under pre-Prop 64 regime)
- People v. Fews, 27 Cal.App.5th 553 (2018) (post-Prop 64 decision upholding search where facts supported inference of unlawful use/open container)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (limits on vehicle searches incident to arrest when arrestee is secured and not within reaching distance)
- Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (2011) (good-faith exception for officers reasonably relying on binding precedent later overruled)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for probable cause)