Summary
The Supreme Court of Florida held that, under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, the totality of the circumstances gave police probable cause to search the entirety of Betz's vehicle, including its trunk. The court quashed the Second District Court of Appeal's decision and approved the result in State v. Jarrett, concluding that California v. Acevedo did not prohibit the search.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether probable cause based on the odor of marijuana, together with the surrounding circumstances and the discovery of marijuana on Betz, authorized a warrantless search of the entire automobile, including its trunk and containers.
- Whether California v. Acevedo limited the automobile exception so that probable cause to search a vehicle's passenger compartment could not support a search of the trunk.
- What standard of review applies to a trial court's suppression ruling when the issue presents mixed questions of law and fact affecting constitutional rights.
Holdings
- When law enforcement has generalized probable cause to believe that contraband is located somewhere within a lawfully stopped vehicle, the automobile exception permits a warrantless search of every part of the vehicle and its contents that may conceal the object of the search, including the trunk.
- The officer had probable cause to search the entirety of Betz's automobile because the odor of marijuana was combined with Betz's suspicious conduct, nervousness, attempts to draw the officer away from the vehicle, and the discovery of marijuana during the pat-down.
- California v. Acevedo did not impliedly overrule State v. Jarrett and did not restrict a vehicle-wide search when officers possess generalized probable cause that contraband is somewhere in the vehicle.
Key quotations
“If probable cause justifies the search of a lawfully stopped vehicle, it justifies the search of every part of the vehicle and its contents that may conceal the object of the search.” (633)
“Based upon the foregoing, we hold that based upon the totality of the circumstances within the perception of the law enforcement officers in the instant case, probable cause to search the entirety of the respondent's vehicle existed.” (635)
Factual background
A Clearwater officer stopped Betz's vehicle after observing that its left headlight was extinguished. The officer smelled a strong odor of marijuana coming from the vehicle and from Betz's clothing, observed smoke, and during a pat-down felt and seized a baggie containing marijuana. After Betz was arrested, officers searched the vehicle and found additional marijuana in a briefcase and metal box inside the trunk.
Procedural history
Betz moved to suppress marijuana seized from his person and from the trunk of his automobile. The trial court denied suppression, and Betz entered a nolo contendere plea and was convicted of felony possession of marijuana. The Second District affirmed suppression of the marijuana seized from Betz's person but reversed as to the trunk search, concluding that probable cause to search the passenger compartment did not extend to the trunk. The Florida Supreme Court quashed the Second District's decision and approved Jarrett.