This post updates an earlier post that briefly noted two recent Maryland appellate court opinions discussing when the odor of marihuana emananting from a vehicle would justify the search of a vehicle and/or the frisk of an occupant of the vehicle. With the decriminalization of less than 10 grams of marihuana in Maryland, but with the courts still considering marihuana to be contraband - as one can still be given a civil citation for the possession of less than 10 grams - the police are still authorized to search a vehicle - but the odor of marihuana by itself - at least in Maryland - does not provide a basis for a weapons frisk. My associate, Megan E. Coleman and I prepared a more detailed analysis of how the opinions in Robinson and Norman have addressed these issues. Click below to read our analysis.
Right to Carry = Right to Frisk
W.Virginia's "right to carry" subjects citizens behaving lawfully while armed to being frisked by a police officer - so says the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The fact that a person is lawfully entitled to carry a firearm does not eliminate the risk to a police officer who confronts such a situation. Review the entire opinion here - http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/144902A.P.pdf
Reasonable suspicion existed to justify a Terry stop and detention
In Chase v. State, the Maryland Court of Appeals held that not only did police officers have reasonable suspicion of drug dealing sufficient to support an investigative detention but the officers' belief that the suspects may be armed and dangerous, based upon the officer's observations of the suspects furtive moments support a Terry frisk. Even though the frisk did not reveal the presence of weapons, the officers were justified in continuing the detention and putting the suspects in handcuffs during the course of detention. The fact that the suspects were in handcuffs during the time that the vehicle had not yet been searched did not convert the detention into an arrest. Chase v. State - read here - Chase v State
