Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
from Nickel DuraCalMatters
This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.
When it comes to impaired driving and the state’s open container law, a rolled-up joint is more like a can of beer to give police a reason to search a car than a few crackers of marijuana, according to Supreme Court of California.
The court’s reasoning: You can smoke a joint and drink beer, but bulk marijuana isn’t easily consumed.
In a today’s decisionThe Supreme Court ruled that police must find marijuana in a ready-to-smoke state if they want to charge a driver with an open container violation.
“We hold that, at a minimum, to constitute a violation of the (open container law), marijuana in a vehicle must be in a usable quantity, in an immediately usable condition, and readily accessible to the passenger,” Judge Goodwin Liu wrote in a unanimous opinion.
The spilled marijuana found on the car’s floorboards was like spilled beer, the court ruled. “In assessing whether marijuana is readily usable or readily available, courts must consider whether the marijuana can be consumed with minimal effort by a passenger in the vehicle,” the court found.
The ruling overturned a magistrate, trial court and California Court of Appeals that agreed that bulk marijuana constituted an open container violation and gave police reason to search a vehicle.
Recreational marijuana has been legal in California since 2016, when voters passed an initiative allowing it. This remains illegal under federal law.
The case in question was outside Sacramento, where officers stopped and searched a car, finding 0.36 grams of marijuana crumbs on the floor of the backseat, along with a tray to roll joints on. The driver was not driving erratically, her registration and license were flawless and there were no warrants issued.
“Neither officer suggested that he was concerned that (the driver and passenger) might have somehow, while riding in the front of the car, collected the scattered pieces of marijuana from the rear floor behind (the passenger) for imminent consumption,” the court ruled. “Nor was there evidence of paraphernalia such as matches, lighters, rolling papers, blunt objects, or vaporizers that could facilitate the consumption of marijuana.”
The Supreme Court also found that the officers had no reasonable cause to search the car in the first place. Police argued that the driver’s nervousness and possession of a removable tray were sufficient to search the car, an argument the court rejected.
This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.