Background
A Michigan State Police trooper stopped Freddie Wilkins, III, for speeding. Wilkins and his front-seat passenger were both under 21. The trooper smelled marijuana through the open passenger-side window but saw no marijuana and observed no signs that either occupant was smoking or intoxicated. After initially denying that they had marijuana, the passenger said she had “some shake,” which the trooper understood to mean a small amount.
The trooper searched the vehicle and found no marijuana, but discovered a loaded semiautomatic pistol with an extended magazine inside a backpack. Wilkins admitted that the pistol belonged to him and was charged with carrying a concealed weapon in a vehicle. The district court bound him over, the circuit court denied his motion to suppress, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the search’s constitutionality.
The Court’s Holding
The Michigan Supreme Court held that the warrantless vehicle search violated the Fourth Amendment. The automobile exception requires probable cause to believe that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found. Under Michigan’s marijuana law, possession by a person under 21 of no more than 2.5 ounces is a civil infraction for a first or second violation, while larger amounts can trigger criminal penalties. Probable cause to suspect only a civil infraction therefore did not justify the search.
Because the amount of marijuana determines whether possession is civil or criminal, the trooper needed probable cause to believe that a criminal amount was present. The odor of marijuana did not establish that fact, either alone or together with the passenger’s statement that she might have a small amount. The Court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.
Key Takeaways
- The automobile exception does not authorize a warrantless vehicle search based solely on probable cause to believe that a civil infraction occurred.
- Marijuana prohibited only under civil law is not “contraband” for purposes of the automobile exception.
- The smell of marijuana does not by itself establish probable cause that a vehicle contains a criminal amount of marijuana.
Why It Matters
The decision limits Michigan vehicle searches following marijuana decriminalization. When the suspected possession would amount only to a civil violation, officers cannot rely on the automobile exception without additional facts supporting probable cause of a crime.
The ruling also clarifies that marijuana odor is not a categorical basis for a vehicle search. Courts must evaluate whether the circumstances support a fair probability that criminal evidence—not merely evidence of a civil violation—will be found.