187 A.3d 896
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2018Background
- Officer Gilliland stopped Stephen Mandel for driving with dark tinted windows and approached the passenger side to speak with him.
- Gilliland asked for identification and, because of passing-traffic noise, leaned his head into the open passenger window to hear responses.
- While conversing (and after briefly placing his head inside the window), Gilliland detected the odor of marijuana and searched the car.
- A small quantity of marijuana was found under the passenger seat; Mandel was charged with possession and with improper safety glass (the tint charge was later dismissed).
- Municipal Court and, on de novo review, the Law Division denied Mandel’s motion to suppress, finding the intrusion minimal and the odor provided probable cause.
- The Appellate Division assumed (without deciding) the head intrusion was a search but affirmed as reasonable under the circumstances and upheld the search based on the officer’s credible testimony and the plain-smell doctrine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether momentarily placing officer’s head through an open car window is a search | State: officer was lawfully in position; brief intrusion did not exceed lawful vantage point | Mandel: head intrusion was an illegal search and put officer outside the lawful "smelling area" | Court assumed it was a search but found it reasonable given minimal intrusion and legitimate purpose (hearing defendant) |
| Whether odor of marijuana provided probable cause after the intrusion | State: odor established probable cause to search the vehicle | Mandel: probable cause arose only after an illegal intrusion, so evidence should be suppressed | Court held the odor of marijuana gives probable cause; officer’s credible explanation and minimal intrusion made the search reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Walker, 213 N.J. 281 (smell of marijuana itself establishes probable cause)
- State v. Myers, 442 N.J. Super. 287 (recognizing plain-smell doctrine; vehicle odor supports probable cause)
- State v. Pena-Flores, 198 N.J. 6 (odor from automobile establishes probable cause to search)
- United States v. Ryles, 988 F.2d 13 (placing head into vehicle constitutes a search)
- United States v. Pierre, 958 F.2d 1304 (brief intrusion to communicate can be reasonable)
- State v. Gonzales, 227 N.J. 77 (warrantless searches presumptively invalid; exceptions like plain view/smell apply)