The case involved a relatively straightforward traffic stop by a Rhode Island State Police trooper on Route I-95 northbound on Memorial Day weekend in 2019. The trooper pulled over the car in Exeter because he observed the passenger sleeping and not wearing a seatbelt. In conversing with the driver and passenger, the trooper detected a “slight” odor of marijuana, and noticed that the driver and passenger were exhibiting nervous behavior. The trooper requested the driver leave the vehicle and sit in the front seat of the state police cruiser while he performed his checks of the driver’s license and vehicle registration. While the driver was in the cruiser, the trooper called for backup and for a canine trained in marijuana detection. After the canine indicated a marijuana odor from the vehicle’s trunk, the trooper opened it and found 94 one-pound vacuum-sealed bags of marijuana.
The driver and passenger were charged with possession with intent to deliver marijuana and with possession of one to five kilograms of marijuana. The defendants moved to suppress the evidence found during the search of the vehicle, on the grounds that the traffic stop became unlawful when it was prolonged beyond the initial reason for the stop, and, in the alternative, that the vehicle was searched and the marijuana was seized without probable cause.
Judge Procaccini reviewed the “growing movement across the United States” to either decriminalize or legalize the possession and use of recreational and medical marijuana. He also noted that Rhode Island currently has decriminalized the possession of one ounce or less of marijuana, has legalized the use of medical marijuana, and has proposed legislation before the General Assembly to legalize recreational marijuana possession and use and tax marijuana sales. He also stated that while the Rhode Island Supreme Court has not yet ruled on how the odor of marijuana affects the reasonable suspicion or probable cause determination in light of the decriminalization of marijuana, two other Superior Court decisions have held that the odor of marijuana can be a factor in the test for probable cause to search a vehicle, because marijuana is still contraband. (See decisions here and here.)
Judge Procaccini went on to distinguish those two decisions because there were additional elements such as prior drug charges, untruthfulness, and visible marijuana, that were not present in the case before him. In addition, he was not persuaded that the officer removed the driver from the vehicle for the officer’s safety, in part because the officer did not conduct a pat down of the driver, did not ask the driver to stand outside the vehicle, and was unaware of whether the driver had a criminal history or existing warrants. Judge Procaccini concluded that removing the driver from the vehicle was a deviation from the traffic enforcement mission of the stop, and, therefore, the trooper prolonged the traffic stop when he removed the driver from the vehicle. He then concluded that nervousness, coupled with the route of travel and the “slight” odor of marijuana, was insufficient to establish reasonable suspicion to prolong the traffic stop. As a result, he granted the motion to suppress.
Because the court concluded that the traffic stop was unreasonably prolonged, the decision does not address whether the state trooper had probable cause to search the vehicle.
Partridge Snow & Hahn’s Cannabis Advisory Practice Blog provides updates on marijuana law and policy, covering some of the risks and opportunities in the industry, and makes recommendations regarding best practices. If you are interested in receiving these updates via email, please submit the form below: