STATE v SCHOENDALLER SCHULTZ

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 13926 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE OF M N A A F OTN 1978 STATE O MONTANA, F P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t , TIMOTHY J . SCHOENDALLER a n d BEN01 SCHULTZ I Defendant and Respondent. D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Ninth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , H o n o r a b l e R. D. M c P h i l l i p s , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . Appeal from: C o u n s e l o f Record: For Appellant: Hon. Mike G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana J o h n P. Moore, County A t t o r n e y , C u t Bank, Montana L a r r y E p s t e i n a r g u e d , Deputy County A t t o r n e y , C u t Bank, Montana For Respondent : Werner a n d N e l s o n , C u t Bank, Montana James C. N e l s o n a r g u e d , C u t Bank, Montana Aronow, A n d e r s o n , B e a t t y & L e e , S h e l b y , Montana B r u c e W. Moerer a r g u e d , S h e l b y , Montana Submitted: Decided : ,>. n\; . F i l e d : ,\Iti 2 :99Q 31&erk March 2 , 1978 - 2 1978 Mr. J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t . The S t a t e o f Montana a p p e a l s from a n o r d e r of t h e ~ i s t r i c C o u r t , G l a c i e r County, s u p p r e s s i n g a l l e v i d e n c e t o b t a i n e d i n t h e s e a r c h o f a n a u t o m o b i l e o p e r a t e d by Benoi S c h u l t z and o c c u p i e d by Timothy S c h o e n d a l l e r . The S t a t e f u r t h e r a p p e a l s from t h e o r d e r of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t d i s missing criminal charges a g a i n s t Schoendaller. On t h e e v e n i n g o f F e b r u a r y 4 , 1977, a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 8 : 5 5 p.m., two on-duty Cut Bank c i t y p o l i c e o f f i c e r s , r i d i n g t o g e t h e r i n t h e i r p a t r o l c a r , o b s e r v e d two v e h i c l e s s t o p p e d i n t h e l a n e s of t r a f f i c on a s t r e e t i n t h e C i t y of Cut Bank. The o f f i c e r s d i r e c t e d t h e v e h i c l e s t o t h e s i d e of t h e r o a d and approached t h e d r i v e r s . One of t h e v e h i c l e s was d r i v e n by S c h u l t z , accompanied by S c h o e n d a l l e r and a f e m a l e j u v e n i l e . O f f i c e r LaBane t o l d S c h u l t z t h e v e h i c l e s were s t o p p e d f o r v i o l a t i n g a Cut Bank c i t y o r d i n a n c e which p r o h i b i t e d " s t o p p i n g i n t h e m i d d l e of t h e s t r e e t " t o t a l k . While s t a n d i n g b e s i d e t h e open d r i v e r ' s window of t h e S c h u l t z v e h i c l e , O f f i c e r LaBane d e t e c t e d t h e odor of m a r i j u a n a and incense. Based on t h i s d e t e c t i o n t h e o f f i c e r d i r e c t e d t h e o c c u p a n t s t o e x i t t h e a u t o m o b i l e and e n t e r t h e r e a r s e a t of t h e p o l i c e p a t r o l c a r . O f f i c e r LaBane t h e n r e q u e s t e d O f f i c e r Babb t o p l a c e h i s head i n t h e window of t h e S c h u l t z a u t o m o b i l e t o s e e i f he c o u l d d e t e c t t h e o d o r of m a r i j u a n a . Upon o b t a i n i n g O f f i c e r Babb's c o n f i r m a t i o n t h a t h e t o o d e t e c t e d t h e o d o r of m a r i j u a n a , O f f i c e r LaBane r e q u e s t e d S c h u l t z ' s p e r m i s s i o n t o s e a r c h t h e a u t o m o b i l e . When permiss i o n was d e n i e d , O f f i c e r LaBane proceeded t o s e a r c h t h e automobile. M a r i j u a n a , m e l l a r i l p i l l s and d r u g smoking p a r a p h e r n a l i a were found i n t h e r e a r s e a t of t h e a u t o m o b i l e . A h a s h i s h p i p e was found on t h e f l o o r b e s i d e t h e f r o n t passenger s e a t . O f f i c e r LaBane r e t u r n e d t o h i s p a t r o l c a r and f o r m a l l y a r r e s t e d t h e d e f e n d a n t s and f e m a l e j u v e n i l e , based upon t h e e v i d e n c e c o n f i s c a t e d i n h i s s e a r c h . A wrecker was d i s p a t c h e d t o p i c k up t h e c a r and i t was impounded a t the police station. Upon a r r i v a l a t t h e p o l i c e s t a t i o n , O f f i c e r Babb conducted a body s e a r c h of d e f e n d a n t s which d i s c l o s e d a " w h i t e r o c k " m a r i j u a n a p i p e found i n t h e p a n t s p o c k e t of S c h o e n d a l l e r . On F e b r u a r y 8, 1977, d e f e n d a n t s were c h a r g e d i n j u s t i c e c o u r t , G l a c i e r County, f o r t h e misdemeanor c r i m e of c r i m i n a l p o s s e s s i o n o f dangerous d r u g s . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t s u b s e - quently granted t h e S t a t e leave t o f i l e Informations charging defendants. On F e b r u a r y , 23, 1977, t h e G l a c i e r County attorney f i l e d Informations charging defendants with t h e c r i m e of c r i m i n a l p o s s e s s i o n o f d a n g e r o u s d r u g s ( a q u a n t i t y of m a r i j u a n a weighing less t h a n 6 0 g r a m s ) , a misdemeanor i n v i o l a t i o n of s e c t i o n 54-133, R.C.M. 1947. Defendants e n t e r e d p l e a s o f n o t g u i l t y and e n t e r e d m o t i o n s t o s u p p r e s s a l l e v i d e n c e o b t a i n e d by t h e p o l i c e w i t h o u t a s e a r c h w a r r a n t . The c a u s e s were c o n s o l i d a t e d f o r t h e p u r p o s e of h e a r i n g t h e motions t o s u p p r e s s . On A p r i l 6 , 1977, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t conducted a h e a r i n g on t h e motions t o s u p p r e s s . B r i e f s i n s u p p o r t of and i n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e m o t i o n s t o s u p p r e s s were s u b m i t t e d t o t h e D i s t r i c t Court. On J u l y 11, 1977, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s s u e d i t s f i n d i n g s of f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s of law and o r d e r g r a n t i n g S c h u l t z ' s motion t o s u p p r e s s on t h e g r o u n d s : " * * * The s e i z i n g o f f i c e r , by h i s t e s t i m o n y and c o n d u c t , d i d n o t have r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t o b e l i e v e t h e c o n t e n t s of t h e a u t o m o b i l e o f f e n d e d a g a i n s t Therefore, probable cause s u f f i c i e n t the law. f o r a s e a r c h , s e p a r a t e from p r o b a b l e c a u s e f o r an arrest, d i d n o t e x i s t . " On t h e same day, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s s u e d i t s f i n d i n g s of f a c t , c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w and o r d e r g r a n t i n g S c h o e n d a l l e r ' s motion t o s u p p r e s s and motion t o d i s m i s s on t h e same grounds and added: " * * * To b r i n g a h e r e i n , more t h a n where a s e a r c h i s probable cause i s arrest. " charge a g a i n s t t h e defendant mere p r e s e n c e i n t h e p l a c e made w i t h o u t f u r t h e r proof of i n s u f f i c i e n t t o j u s t i f y an The S t a t e r a i s e s two i s s u e s f o r review: 1. Whether a p o l i c e o f f i c e r ' s d e t e c t i o n of t h e odor of m a r i j u a n a emanating from i n s i d e a n a u t o m o b i l e i s s u f f i c i e n t p r o b a b l e c a u s e f o r t h e w a r r a n t l e s s s e a r c h of t h e a u t o m o b i l e and t h e s u b s e q u e n t a r r e s t of t h e o c c u p a n t s on t h e b a s i s of evidence seized i n t h e search? 2. Whether t h e p r e s e n c e of S c h o e n d a l l e r i n t h e a u t o - m o b i l e c o n s t i t u t e d s u f f i c i e n t p r o b a b l e c a u s e f o r (1) h i s a r r e s t on t h e b a s i s of e v i d e n c e s e i z e d i n t h e w a r r a n t l e s s s e a r c h of t h e a u t o m o b i l e and ( 2 ) t h e s u b s e q u e n t s e a r c h of h i s p e r s o n a t t h e p o l i c e s t a t i o n and t h e s e i z u r e of e v i d e n c e ? The law of s e a r c h and s e i z u r e i s c o d i f i e d as C h a p t e r 7 , T i t l e 95, Revised Codes of Montana. S e c t i o n 95-701, R.C.M. 1947, s p e c i f i c a l l y p r o v i d e s : " S e a r c h e s and seizures--when a u t h o r i z e d . A s e a r c h of a p e r s o n , o b j e c t o r p l a c e may be made and i n s t r u m e n t s , a r t i c l e s o r t h i n g s may be s e i z e d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h i s c h a p t e r when t h e s e a r c h i s made: "(a) A s an i n c i d e n t t o a lawful a r r e s t . " ( b ) With t h e c o n s e n t of t h e a c c u s e d o r of any o t h e r p e r s o n who i s l a w f u l l y i n poss e s s i o n of t h e o b j e c t o r p l a c e t o b e s e a r c h e d , o r who i s b e l i e v e d upon r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t o be i n such l a w f u l p o s s e s s i o n by t h e p e r s o n making t h e search. " (c) warrant. By t h e a u t h o r i t y of a s e a r c h " ( d ) Under t h e a u t h o r i t y and w i t h i n t h e s c o p e of a r i g h t of l a w f u l i n s p e c t i o n g r a n t e d by law." The f a c t s o f t h e p r e s e n t c a s e d e m o n s t r a t e a c l e a r a b s e n c e o f e i t h e r s e a r c h and s e i z u r e i n c i d e n t t o a l a w f u l a r r e s t , consent o r search pursuant t o a v a l i d search warrant. Thus, t h e q u e s t i o n becomes whether t h e i n s t a n t s e a r c h and s e i z u r e i s a u t h o r i z e d under s u b p a r a g r a p h ( d ) , " * * * within the s c o p e o f a r i g h t of l a w f u l i n s p e c t i o n g r a n t e d by law." The United S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t l o n g ago announced t h e r u l e of law a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e w a r r a n t l e s s s e a r c h and s e i z u r e of an automobile: "On r e a s o n and a u t h o r i t y t h e t r u e r u l e i s t h a t i f t h e s e a r c h and s e i z u r e w i t h o u t a w a r r a n t a r e made upon p r o b a b l e c a u s e , t h a t i s , upon a b e l i e f , r e a s o n a b l y a r i s i n g o u t of c i r c u m s t a n c e s known t o t h e s e i z i n g o f f i c e r , t h a t an automobile o r o t h e r v e h i c l e c o n t a i n s t h a t which by l a w i s s u b j e c t t o s e i z u r e and d e s t r u c t i o n , t h e s e a r c h and s e i z u r e a r e v a l i d . The F o u r t h Amendment i s t o b e c o n s t r u e d i n t h e l i g h t of what w a s deemed a n u n r e a s o n a b l e s e a r c h and s e i z u r e when i t was a d o p t e d , and i n a manner which w i l l c o n s e r v e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t s a s w e l l a s t h e i n t e r e s t s and r i g h t s of i n d i v i d u a l c i t i z e n s . " * * * I n c a s e s where t h e s e c u r i n g of a w a r r a n t i s r e a s o n a b l y p r a c t i c a b l e , i t must be u s e d , and when p r o p e r l y s u p p o r t e d by a f f i d a v i t and i s s u e d a f t e r j u d i c i a l a p p r o v a l p r o t e c t s t h e s e i z i n g o f f i c e r a g a i n s t a s u i t f o r damages. I n c a s e s where s e i z u r e i s i m p o s s i b l e e x c e p t w i t h o u t w a r r a n t , t h e s e i z i n g o f f i c e r a c t s u n l a w f u l l y and a t h i s p e r i l u n l e s s he c a n show t h e c o u r t p r o b a b l e cause." C a r r o l l v . United S t a t e s , ( 1 9 2 5 ) , 267 U.S. 132, 1 4 9 , 1 5 6 , 45 S.Ct. 280, 69 L.Ed. 543, 549, 552. C a r r o l l and i t s progeny c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h t h e r i g h t t o s e a r c h a n a u t o m o b i l e and s e i z e e v i d e n c e from t h e r i g h t t o arrest: " * * * The r i g h t t o s e a r c h and t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e s e i z u r e a r e n o t dependent on t h e r i g h t t o a r r e s t . They a r e d e p e n d e n t on t h e r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t h e s e i z i n g o f f i c e r h a s f o r b e l i e f t h a t t h e cont e n t s of t h e a u t o m o b i l e o f f e n d a g a i n s t t h e law." 267 U.S. 158, 159. See a l s o : S.Ct. Chambers v . Maroney, ( 1 9 7 0 ) , 399 U.S. 42, 90 1975, 26 L ed 2d 419; Coolidge v. N e w Hampshire, ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 403 U.S. 443, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29 L ed 2d 564. W e f i n d no e r r o r i n t h e p o l i c e o f f i c e r ' s i n i t i a l d e t e n t i o n of d e f e n d a n t s . S c h u l t z was i n v i o l a t i o n of a Cut Bank c i t y o r d i n a n c e when h e s t o p p e d h i s v e h i c l e i n t h e s t r e e t f o r t h e p u r p o s e of c o n v e r s i n g w i t h t h e d r i v e r of a n o t h e r v e h i c l e , s i m i l a r l y blocking t h e s t r e e t . The c r u c i a l q u e s t i o n i s whether t h e o f f i c e r ' s d e t e c t i o n of t h e o l d o d o r of i n c e n s e and m a r i j u a n a smoked sometime i n t h e p a s t emanating from t h e automobile i s s u f f i c i e n t probable cause f o r O f f i c e r LaBanels e n t r y i n t o t h e a u t o m o b i l e , l a c k i n g any e x i g e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s , f o r t h e w a r r a n t l e s s s e a r c h of t h e a u t o m o b i l e and t h e s u b s e q u e n t a r r e s t of t h e o c c u p a n t s on t h e b a s i s of evidence seized i n t h e search. I n S t a t e v . Spielmann, C h r i s t e n s o n , 1 9 9 , 205, 516 P.2d ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 163 Mont. 617, t h i s C o u r t c i t e d w i t h a p p r o v a l t h e following d e f i n i t i o n of probable cause: "One need n o t have e v i d e n c e which would j u s t i f y conviction; probable cause e x i s t s i f t h e f a c t s and c i r c u m s t a n c e s known t o t h e o f f i c e r would w a r r a n t a p r u d e n t man i n b e l i e v i n g t h a t t h e o f f e n s e h a s been o r i s b e i n g committed. On t h e o t h e r hand, p r o b a b l e c a u s e means more t h a n a b a r e s u s p i c i o n , t h e l i n e between mere s u s p i c i o n and p r o b a b l e c a u s e 'must b e drawn by a n a c t o f judgment formed i n t h e l i g h t of t h e p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n and w i t h a c c o u n t t a k e n of a l l t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . ' " United S t a t e s v. Thompson, ( 3 r d C i r . 1 9 7 0 ) , 420 F.2d 536, 539. The S t a t e h a s c i t e d some b o r d e r p a t r o l c a s e s which i n v o l v e smoke and b u r n i n g m a r i j u a n a b u t t h e s e a r e e a s i l y d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e by v i r t u e of t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s e x i s t i n g a t n a t i o n a l b o r d e r s i n t e r m s of n a t i o n a l s e l f - p r o t e c t i o n . ~ u t those lawfully within t h e country, e n t i t l e d t o use t h e p u b l i c highways, have a r i g h t t o f r e e p a s s a g e w i t h o u t i n t e r r u p t i o n o r s e a r c h u n l e s s a competent o f f i c i a l a u t h o r i z e d t o search has probable cause f o r believing t h a t v e h i c l e s a r e c a r r y i n g c o n t r a b a n d o r i l l e g a l merchandise. Carroll v. U n i t e d S t a t e s , s u p r a . The b o r d e r p a t r o l c a s e s a r e n o t p e r s u a s i v e when a p p l i e d t o t h e f a c t s of t h e p r e s e n t c a s e i n l i g h t of r i g h t t o p r i v a c y and s e a r c h and s e i z u r e p r o t e c t i o n s g u a r a n t e e d by t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n and t h e 1972 Montana Constitution. A d d i t i o n a l c a s e a u t h o r i t y c i t e d by t h e S t a t e i n v o l v e s w a r r a n t l e s s s e a r c h e s conducted a f t e r i n v e s t i g a t o r y o f f i c i a l s under d i f f e r e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s d e t e c t e d t h e o d o r of p r e s e n t l y burning marijuana. suppression hearing: Here, O f f i c e r LaBane t e s t i f i e d a t t h e " I asked f o r M r . Schultz's driver's l i c e n s e and a t t h e same t i m e I s m e l l e d a s t r o n g o d o r of m a r i j u a n a i n t h e c a r a l o n g w i t h t h a t of some i n c e n s e o r something, and * * * ." O f f i c e r LaBane f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t a l t h o u g h m a r i j u a n a h a s a v e r y d i s t i n c t i v e o d o r , he c o u l d n o t d e t e r m i n e whether d e f e n d a n t s were smoking m a r i j u a n a when t h e p o l i c e o f f i c e r s came upon them o r whether m a r i j u a n a had been smoked i n t h e a u t o m o b i l e w i t h i n t h e p r e v i o u s hour o r more. O f f i c e r LaBane d i d a g r e e t h a t t h e mere o d o r of m a r i j u a n a m i g h t l i n g e r i n a n a u t o m o b i l e f o r more t h a n a day. The p o l i c e conducted t h e i r w a r r a n t l e s s s e a r c h on t h e b a s i s of "* * * a s t r o n g o d o r of m a r i j u a n a i n t h e c a r a l o n g w i t h t h a t of some i n c e n s e o r something* * *" and l a c k i n g any e x i g e n t circumstances, such perception f a l l s c l o s e r t o t h e realm of b a r e s u s p i c i o n than probable cause. W e do n o t deny p o l i c e o f f i c e r s t h e r i g h t t o r e l y on t h e i r s e n s e of s m e l l t o confirm t h e i r observations. However, t o h o l d t h a t a n o d o r a l o n e , a b s e n t e v i d e n c e of v i s i b l e c o n t e n t s , i s deemed e q u i v a l e n t t o p l a i n view m i g h t v e r y e a s i l y m i s l e a d o f f i c e r s i n t o f r u i t l e s s i n v a s i o n s of p r i v a c y where t h e r e i s no c o n t r a b a n d . There i s v e r y l i t t l e d i s p u t e c o n c e r n i n g t h e a p p l i c a b l e law i n t h i s m a t t e r . However, c l o s e q u e s t i o n p r e s e n t s i t s e l f on t h e f a c t s i n v o l v e d . Again, t h i s C o u r t i s f a c e d w i t h a c o l d r e c o r d , w h i l e t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t h e a r d t h e e v i d e n c e and had t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o o b s e r v e t h e demeanor and c o n d u c t of each witness. A s a r e s u l t t h e law i n s t r u c t s t h i s C o u r t t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s judgment comes t o u s w i t h a p r e s u m p t i o n of c o r r e c t n e s s and t h e S t a t e h e r e must overcome t h i s presumption by a p r e p o n d e r a n c e o f t h e e v i d e n c e . T h i s burden h a s n o t been met. T h e r e f o r e we must c o n c l u d e t h e p o l i c e o f f i c e r s d i d n o t have s u f f i c i e n t p r o b a b l e c a u s e t o s e a r c h t h e a u t o m o b i l e d r i v e n by S c h u l t z . Evidence u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y s e i z e d d u r i n g t h e s e a r c h was p r o p e r l y s u p p r e s s e d by t h e D i s t r i c t Court. S i n c e t h e s u b s e q u e n t a r r e s t of S c h o e n d a l l e r and t h e s e a r c h of h i s p e r s o n was t h e f r u i t of t h e u n l a w f u l s e a r c h and s e i z u r e , t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t p r o p e r l y s u p p r e s s e d e v i d e n c e s e i z e d from S c h o e n d a l l e r and p r o p e r l y g r a n t e d S c h o e n d a l l e r ' s motion t o d i s m i s s . The o r d e r s o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t g r a n t i n g d e f e n d a n t ' s motions t o s u p p r e s s and S c h o e n d a l l e r ' s motion t o d i s m i s s a r e affirmed. / Justice W Concur: e Chief J u s t i c g 4 I Hon.' L. Cf; Gulbrandson, D i s t r i c t Judge, s i t t i n g i n t h e vacant s e a t of t h e C o u r t . M r . J u s t i c e John C . Harrison d i s s e n t i n g : I dissent. This Court has twice i n t h e r e c e n t p a s t d e a l t with cases considering whether t h e odor of marihuana c o n s t i t u t e s probable cause f o r a r r e s t and search. S t a t e v. H u l l , (1971), 158 Mont. 6 , 487 P.2d 1314; S t a t e v. Bennett, (1972), 158 Mont. 496, 493 P.2d 1077. While i n Hull t h e o f f i c e r s had been n o t i f i e d t h a t a pot p a r t y was i n p r o g r e s s , a f a c t n o t p r e s e n t i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , one of t h e c o n t r o l l i n g f a c t o r s i n t h i s C o u r t ' s a f f i r m i n g t h e c o n v i c t i o n was t h e aroma of burning o r b u r n t marihuana emanating from t h e residence. There, l i k e h e r e , no marihuana o r hashish was v i s i b l e when t h e o f f i c e r s went i n t o t h e home. I n Bennett, t h e o f f i c e r s smelled t h e marihuana when they e n t e r e d t h e apartment b u i l d i n g , and b e f o r e going u p s t a i r s t o t h e apartment occupied by t h e defendants. - While Hull and Bennett d i f f e r f a c t u a l l y from t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , I b e l i e v e they have u n t i l now stood f o r t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e odor of burning o r b u r n t marihuana g i v e s o f f i c e r s probable cause t o s e a r c h and a r r e s t . C a l i f o r n i a , i n an opium c a s e , found s u f f i c i e n t cause t o s e a r c h and a r r e s t i n People v. Bock Leung Chew, (1956), 142 Cal. App.2d 400, 298 P.2d 118. Also C a l i f o r n i a , i n a c a s e where t h e smell of marihuana odors came from a h o t e l room, t h e c o u r t upheld a c o n v i c t i o n . P l a c e r , 273 Cal.App.2d V a i l l a n c o u r t v. S u p e r i o r Court f o r County of 791, 78 C a l i f . Rptr. 615 (1969). I n Arizona t h e c o u r t allowed t h e s e a r c h of ax automobile trunk from which a "very f a i n t 1 ' odor of marihuana was d e t e c t e d . S t a t e v. Zamora, (1977), 114 Ariz. 75, 559 P.2d 195, 197. This c a s e , l i k e t h e one b e f o r e u s , was an automobile case and I would adhere t o t h e r u l e e s t a b l i s h e d t h e r e , t h a t : "* * * The odor of marijuana i s i n i t s e l f enough t o provide probable c a u s e t o i n i t i a t e a search. Nor i s t h e r e any requirement t h a t i t be a s t r o n g odor. 11 *** P o l i c e o f f i c e r s have t o use n o t o n l y good judgment i n h a n d l i n g c a s e s of t h i s t y p e , b u t must r e l y much on t h e i r three senses - s i g h t , s m e l l and h e a r i n g . To l i m i t them t o s i g h t and h e a r i n g , and n o t s m e l l w i l l , i n m o p i n i o n , make t h e i r y d i f f i c u l t t a s k even more d i f f i c u l t . I would o v e r r u l e t h e D i s t r i c t Court and r e i n s t a t e t h e S t a t e ' s criminal charge.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.