cannabisnews.com: MJ Smoke Odor in Car Not Enough for Police Action?
function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('MJ Smoke Odor in Car Not Enough for Police Action?');
 url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/26/thread26484.shtml');
 site = new Array(5);
 site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
 return false;
}






MJ Smoke Odor in Car Not Enough for Police Action?
Posted by CN Staff on April 20, 2011 at 08:36:48 PT
By Reuters
Source: Reuters
Boston -- The smell of marijuana smoke is no longer enough reason for police to order someone out of a car, now that pot has been decriminalized in Massachusetts, the state's highest court said in a decision published on Tuesday.The ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was in response to an appeal filed by lawyers for Benjamin Cruz from Boston, whom police ordered out of a car in 2009 when they approached the vehicle parked in front of a fire hydrant and smelled marijuana.
Cruz was later charged with possession of a class B controlled substance with intent to distribute and committing a controlled substance violation in a school zone.The high court said a key factor in its decision was the 2008 change in state law which made possession of one ounce or less of marijuana a civil rather than a criminal offense."Without at least some other additional fact to bolster a reasonable suspicion of actual criminal activity, the odor of burned marijuana alone cannot reasonably provide suspicion of criminal activity to justify an exit order," the opinion said.In a dissenting opinion, now retired Justice Judith Cowin wrote, "Even though possession of a small amount of marijuana is now no longer criminal, it may serve as the basis for a reasonable suspicion that activities involving marijuana, that are indeed criminal, are underway.""The odor of marijuana permits an officer reasonably to suspect that the parties involved are in possession of criminal quantities of marijuana or are in possession of marijuana with intent to distribute," she wrote.Reporting by Lauren Keiper; Editing by Barbara Goldberg and Jerry NortonSource: Reuters (Wire)Published: April 20, 2011Copyright: 2011 Thomson ReutersCannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help 
     
     
     
     




Comment #3 posted by HempWorld on April 20, 2011 at 10:18:55 PT
Thanks Sam Adams, for your excellent comments,
as usual, I might add. I always enjoy reading them. Happy 420 All! We are winning! Watch Canada and Mexico, big changes coming.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on April 20, 2011 at 10:10:56 PT
crime-fighting
>>>The state’s highest court, overturning precedent and denying police a crime-fighting toolLast time I checked, the Bill of Rights doesn't say "police and prosecutors have the right to make any laws they need to make their job easier"The Bill of Rights is actually based on the concept of Probable Cause - freedom from government search or harassment unless there's probably cause that a CRIME has been committed.I'm sure Nazi Germany was absolute paradise for "police and prosecutors"
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Sam Adams on April 20, 2011 at 10:05:55 PT
old reliable Reuters
Nice job by Reuters. The headline with the question mark - not sure of the purpose. Are they questioning the rule of law in America? Our system of checks and balances? Or is the question mark an indictment of democratic society in general?I see they also quote the one Justice who dissented - 5 vote in favor. But of course Reuters did not bother to report the actual 5-1 vote total. Here's a fairly balanced report:http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/04/20/sjc_overturns_precedent_on_marijuana_odor/The state’s highest court, overturning precedent and denying police a crime-fighting tool, ruled yesterday that the odor of marijuana smoke is not enough for officers to order a person out of a parked car, now that possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is no longer a crime in Massachusetts.“Without at least some other additional fact to bolster a reasonable suspicion of actual criminal activity, the odor of burnt marijuana alone cannot reasonably provide suspicion of criminal activity to justify an exit order,’’ the court ruled in a 5-to-1 decision written by Chief Justice Roderick Ireland.The justices ruled that voters, in passing the 2008 ballot question, intended that possessing an ounce or less of marijuana “should not be considered a serious infraction worthy of criminal sanction.’’“Ferreting out decriminalized conduct with the same fervor associated with the pursuit of serious criminal conduct is neither desired by the public, nor in accord with the plain language of the statute,’’ Roderick wrote.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment