share_log

Police Can Search Cars For Raw Cannabis Smell, Illinois Supreme Court Says

Police Can Search Cars For Raw Cannabis Smell, Illinois Supreme Court Says

伊利诺伊州最高法院表示,警方可以因大麻股气味搜索汽车。
Benzinga ·  12/06 06:53

The Illinois Supreme Court has decided that the smell of raw cannabis is enough for police to search a vehicle.

伊利诺伊州最高法院已决定,生大麻的气味足以让警方搜查车辆。

The ruling, which contrasts with an earlier decision that the smell of burnt cannabis is not enough for a search, has sparked legal and public debate over how cannabis laws are applied in the state, the Chicago Tribune reported.

这一裁决与早些时候的决定形成对比,后者认为烧过的大麻的气味不足以进行搜查,这引发了关于该州大麻法律适用的法律和公众辩论,《芝加哥论坛报》报道。

Two Cases, Two Different Outcomes

两起案件,两种不同的结果

The decision stems from a case involving Vincent Molina, a passenger in a car stopped for speeding on I-88 near the Illinois-Iowa border in December 2020.

该决定源于一起涉及文森特·莫利纳的案件,莫利纳是于2020年12月在伊利诺伊州-爱荷华州边境的I-88上因超速被拦下的车辆乘客。

A state trooper claimed to smell cannabis through the open window, prompting a search that uncovered several joints and cannabis stored in a sealed box. While Illinois legalized small amounts of cannabis in 2020, Molina was charged with improper transport for not using an odor-proof container.

一名州警声称通过开着的窗户闻到了大麻的气味,从而进行搜查,发现了几个大麻卷烟和存放在密封盒中的大麻。尽管伊利诺伊州在2020年合法化了少量大麻,但莫利纳因未使用防气味容器而被指控运输不当。

Initially, a court ruled the search unjustified. However, an appeals court reversed that decision, leading to the state Supreme Court's involvement. The court ruled that the smell of raw cannabis strongly suggests a violation of Illinois law, which requires cannabis in vehicles to be stored in an odor-proof container.

最初,法院判决认为搜查不当。然而,上诉法院推翻了该决定,导致州最高法院介入。法院裁定,生大麻的气味强烈暗示违反了伊利诺伊法律,该法律要求车辆中的大麻存放在防气味容器中。

In a separate case heard by the court, People v. Ryan Redmond, the justices ruled that the smell of burnt cannabis doesn't justify a vehicle search, as it could simply indicate prior use outside the vehicle.

在法院审理的另一起案件,人民诉瑞安·雷德蒙德案中,法官裁定,烧过的大麻的气味不足以证明进行车辆搜查,因为这可能仅仅表明在车辆外先前的使用。

Confusion Over Legal Standards

法律标准的混淆

This split in rulings has drawn criticism. Justice Mary K. O'Brien, joined by Chief Justice Mary Jane Theis, dissented in the Molina case. "It makes no sense to treat raw cannabis as more probative when the odor of burnt cannabis may suggest recent use, whereas the odor of raw cannabis does not suggest consumption," O'Brien wrote.

这一裁决分歧引起了批评。法官玛丽·K·奥布莱恩与首席法官玛丽·简·泰斯在莫利纳案中持异议。"把生大麻视为更具证明力没有道理,因为燃烧大麻的气味可能暗示最近使用,而生大麻的气味并不暗示消费,"奥布莱恩写道。

Meanwhile, defense attorney James Mertes, stated: "This means that the privacy rights of motorists in Illinois have been turned over to the police officer's sense of smell," Mertes said. He plans to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

与此同时,辩护律师詹姆斯·梅尔特斯表示:"这意味着伊利诺伊州机动车辆的隐私权已转交给警察的嗅觉,"梅尔特斯说道。他计划将这一决定上诉至美国最高法院。

A Legislative Puzzle

立法难题

Adding to the confusion, Illinois lawmakers previously removed the odor-proof container requirement from the cannabis legalization law but left it in the vehicle code. The state Supreme Court suggested this legal mismatch needs fixing.

更复杂的是,伊利诺伊州立法者之前从大麻合法化法案中撤除了防臭容器的要求,但仍然保留在车辆法中。州最高法院建议这一法律不匹配需要修正。

"I am discouraged by the Illinois Supreme Court's decision, but I am encouraged to now ask that this matter be decided by the United States Supreme Court," Molina said in a statement.

"我对伊利诺伊州最高法院的决定感到沮丧,但我很高兴现在要求美国最高法院来决定此事,"莫利纳在一份声明中说。

  • Is Weed Worse Than Alcohol For Driving? New Study Challenges Common DUI Assumptions
  • 大麻开车比酒精更糟糕吗?新研究挑战了常见的醉驾假设。

Cover image made with AI.

由AI制作的封面图。

声明:本内容仅用作提供资讯及教育之目的,不构成对任何特定投资或投资策略的推荐或认可。 更多信息
    抢沙发