2022 IL App (3d) 210098
Ill. App. Ct.2022Background
- May 9, 2020 (3:57 a.m.): deputy stopped defendant's SUV for traffic violations; parties stipulated to these facts and no other evidence was introduced.
- When defendant opened his window the deputy detected a strong odor of burnt cannabis coming from the vehicle.
- Defendant said someone had smoked in the car "a long time ago."
- Officer searched the vehicle based on the odor and statement; defendant was later charged with unlawful possession of a firearm in a vehicle.
- Defendant moved to suppress; the circuit court granted the motion, finding the odor plus the admission insufficient to establish probable cause under the automobile exception.
- State appealed, arguing People v. Stout remained controlling and that the odor of burnt cannabis alone supplies probable cause; the appeal occurred after Illinois legalized recreational cannabis (effective Jan. 1, 2020).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the odor of burnt cannabis alone gives probable cause to search a vehicle after recreational legalization | Stout controls; smell of burnt cannabis still indicates contraband and justifies search; smoking in a vehicle remains illegal | Legalization/decriminalization reduce odor's probative value; odor can linger and needs corroboration (analogous to alcohol) | Odor alone is not enough post-legalization; Stout is not controlling for post-legalization fact patterns |
| Whether the officer had probable cause to search the Stribling vehicle given the strong odor and defendant's statement | Odor + admission justified search in the circumstances | Odor plus a statement that someone smoked "a long time ago" is insufficient; no other corroborating evidence of illegal possession or impairment | Under the stipulated facts, no probable cause existed; suppression affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Stout, 106 Ill. 2d 77 (Ill. 1985) (prelegalization rule that odor of cannabis alone justified vehicle search)
- People v. Hill, 2020 IL 124595 (Ill. 2020) (declined to decide whether odor alone suffices post-medical/decriminalization; held corroborating facts can support probable cause)
- Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (U.S. 1925) (establishes automobile exception to warrant requirement)
- California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (U.S. 1991) (automobile exception permits warrantless vehicle searches when probable cause exists)
- United States v. Karo, 468 U.S. 705 (U.S. 1984) (searches without warrant presumptively unreasonable except limited exceptions)
- Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730 (U.S. 1983) (probable cause standard: reasonable probability items are contraband or evidence of crime)