The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the smell of marijuana alone no longer gives police enough probable cause to conduct a search. That reverses a 25-year precedent.
The court found things changed when Michigan voters approved recreational adult-use marijuana in 2018.
Despite that, the defendant in the case was still charged from a marijuana-related search in 2020. The man was arrested after police searched a car he was in because they smelled marijuana.
His attorney, Andrew Sullivan, said this week’s Supreme Court opinion should’ve been unnecessary.
“The opinion should be understood to educate us and educate police on the innocent possession of marijuana, not giving any cause for police to pull someone over, but also that when laws change through voter initiatives, that that is enough to overrule prior court opinions,” Sullivan said.
But Midland County Prosecutor J. Dee Brooks said the rules create more confusion for officers.
“I think you're getting into some fine-line distinctions that they're being called on to make,” Brooks said, bringing up concerns over how to enforce traffic laws when someone’s suspected of driving under the influence of marijuana.
The court ruling still allows marijuana smell to be a factor in deciding if there’s probable cause to conduct a search.
Lawyer Ramis Wadood with the ACLU of Michigan said police will still have to catch up to the law.
“They're going to have to change their practices if they smell marijuana on the street, if they smell marijuana while driving past someone's house or someone's parked car. This is really going to restrain unconstitutional police practices across the state,” Wadood said.
He called it a “huge win” for rights under the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, which outlaws “unreasonable searches and seizures.”
Meanwhile, Brooks said he was focused on making sure officers have accurate information for their policies.
“Even something that's a pretty strong odor of marijuana in and of itself, they need to make sure that they're looking for other signs and looking at the totality of the circumstances before they either continue their investigation further and certainly before they develop probable cause,” Brooks said.