(And I realize it would depend on the jurisdiction)

In the UK this would be seen as a valid justification.

I found this article that applies to some of this:
http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2009/06/20/us-supreme-court-limits-vehicle-searches/

What it says is that anything that could come into immediate possession of a person under arrest is subject to search, so if you are being arrested, your person can be searched. Whether or not the smell of marijuana is enough to grab you is probably not that relevant; I would see it going something like this:
1. Officer smells marijuana on you.
2. Officer talks to you about it and asks you some questions.
3. You answer in whatever way you want, but if the officer wants to arrest you, he figures out a reason to do so (being disorderly, jaywalking, lying to a police officer, etc.).
4. Now that you are arrested, you are searched, and the officer finds some marijuana on you.

That linked case is regarding vehicle searches. I'm more interested in walking around in public and smelling...

The reality of the situation in NYC at least is a cop can stop you and search you for pretty much whatever reason they make up. not that it happens all the time or that they abuse it like crazy, but if they want to they can. dont give them reason to want to

I'll let a lawyer give any detailed reply or rebuttal, but it is my understanding that your person cannot be searched without probably cause unless your arrested which is a defatco probable cause for the safety of the officer (weapons searches). The question would be, does the smell of pot constitute probable cause... I think it could be argued that the smell can't absolutely be identified as coming from you and that, even if it was, it just means you were recently somewhere that someone was smoking a joint, not that you personally did it. If the cop asks if they can search you or your belongings, say no. Tell you you do *not* consent to their search and seizure. Then, when it goes to court, the evidence has a good chance of being thrown out and, with no evidence, they have no case.

From my understanding, Draugnar is fairly accurate.

The essential matter is the nebulous "probable cause". Basically, the officer has to have cause to want to search you.... he/she can't just search you if he wants to (with particular exceptions... on a traffic stop, a police officer is permitted to ask you to step out and pat you down with their hands). If he were to see your nickel bag laying on the seat when he asks for your ID and registration, then he's got cause to search your entire car. A smell..... that's getting into a judgment call. At a traffic stop, where the smell could only be coming from you or your car, then it would probably hold up in court.

A pedestrian stop.... unless he saw a joint or some such, it probably wouldn't. Probably. In any case, I would go with the standard rule of refusing to be searched or have your car searched. If they think they have probable cause, they'll do so anyhow, and if they're just fishing, there is no reason to give them permission. I had a roomate who did a year and a half because his trunk was full of grass, but he was scared, so he tried to bluff the cop and gave him permission.

You have to understand the mentality of a police officer. Busting somebody up for pot possession in a city is small fries. And trying to do so with a pedestrian stop with the only probable cause is a smell.... thats just asking for a competent lawyer to get the whole thing thrown out. Which makes the department look like incompetent assholes. They're going to want to be sure they can make the charges stick if they're going to arrest you for possession. And simply a smell out in the streets? Very flimsy.

Long story short: They can try. But its unlikely to hold up in court.

I would say some it would depend on a lot on the jurisdiction. If you are in Ann Arbor, MI, for instance (where I think the fine is like $5 and you lose your joint if you get caught with one), you might have a good shot at getting off with nothing. If you are in a jurisdiction like one where my brother got pulled over late at night while going the speed limit and staying within his lane for "hugging the fog line," (nothing happened, but he was a bt annoyed) then I would say that your odds might not be so good since the officer will likely have some sort of excuse (which is very hard to deny) for why he needed to arrest/search you.

Also, the case I cited applied to motor vehicles, but it also explained the search rules as they pertain to the effects on your person.

Why do you ask by the way? Have you been searched by the police, and feeling violated, or what? Just interested as to what caused you to post this thread.

Interesting story as an aside, a bar of chocolate once saved a friend of mine from being arrested. I drink in a pub which has a rock/punk clientele and is therefore regarded by the police as being a hotspot for dope use. Generally they maintain a very light touch on the basis that at least they know where all the freaks hang out, and it's better for them to have us all in the same place.

Anyway, very occasionally (like every couple of years) they raid the place, to make a few minor arrests and justify to their superiors the way they leave us alone most of the time. So last year such a raid took place, including drugs sniffer dogs. A friend of mine sitting next to me when they burst in was looking pretty worried, because he had a fairly large amount of hash in his jacket. He's not a dealer but had just collected his month's supply.

As the police came in, the drugs sniffer dog went straight for our table. My friend was sweating. At the last moment however, the dog stuck his nose inside my jacket, where my inside pocket contained... a half-eaten bar of chocolate.

So I got searched, but was clean, and my friend escaped further attention.

I'm sorry Jamie, but I have to press the bullsh*t buzzer on that one. A properly trained police dog can easily distinguish between a chocolate bar and a joint and is trained to only go for the pot. Same with the explosives sniffing blood hounds and the search and rescue dogs. These animals, when properly trained and fed, don't make mistakes.

I am posting this because I have a 16 year old who loves smoking weed, and he gets really self-righteous towards anyone who tries to tell him what to do, be they parents, teachers, etc. I don't think he has had any run-ins with the police, but my fear is that he will be a self-righteous ahole the first time he sees an officer because he thinks smoking pot should be legal, therefore he can treat the cop with disrespect. While I don't disagree about the first part, the 2nd part is not going to turn out well.

He doesn't realize that after smoking, he usually stinks. My fear is him running into an officer and he being a self-righteous ahole. So I would like to 1) Teach him that occasionally treating someone with respect will bet better for you and 2) Teach him to change his shirt after smoking, spray deodorant, something. And to realize just because you think something is a bad law doesn't mean the police officer won't try to enforce it, especially if you're an asshole.

i mean obviously...

I would say yes. Without reading what you all said lol.

Tell him that though you can't be charged for BEING high, you can be charged for possession of marajuana. So just tell him to leave the shit at home, and not to mess with cops, because they have guns.

This warning about cops is 50-fold if he is black or Mexican.

Welcome to having a 16 year old?

Sorry dude. Maybe this is the advantage of being outside the problem, but once you get to about that age, you're done raising them. :P

Best thing you can do is make sure he knows he can get advice from you, and pray to Cthulu that he doesn't do anything silly.

Remind him that even if charges are dropped, he could still spend the night in the tank at the local cop shop, and depending on the town, that could be anywhere from kind of boring to downright terrifying.

I'm not sure if this is the exact same for humans themselves, but under privacy "rights" laws, the feel of someone's baggage is protected but not the smell. That's why at my school, they have drug dog sniff lockers, backpacks and cars. If the dog goes apeshit then they can search. I'm not sure if that works on people too, and it might also be different outside of school because we're on government property and we're mostly minors. I do know for sure that the smell of your possessions is not protected by a "reasonable right to privacy."

I remember my first and, to date, only night in jail... Morning breakfast was donuts and coffee. What the hell?! I'm a diabetic! I can't eat donuts! And I hate coffee! So I went to court hungry had my arraignment, paid my bail, and went to Burger King. Charges ended up being dropped. If I was actually trying to hit my wife with the car, don't you think I would have succeeded?! It's a freaking Corvette! Had to go through domestic violence counseling in exchange for the dropped charges. Bullshitted my way through that and now we are almost halfway through our 22nd year together. Fucking cop was a block away and saw me doing donuts in the parking lot. She (yes, a chick with a badge and gun) got up there, saw my wife upset, and assumed I tried to hit her with the car. Moron bitch!

@ DingleberryJones - I suggest a good beating fo your son. I don't smoke and nether do most of my friends. However, one time at a party one of my friends tried to go off and smoke with shady characters so a third friend and I forcibly restrained him from doing so via chokeholds and good form tackles. Moral of the story: force does work on idiots who try to smoke their brains away.

@LJ - I somehow think Dingle might get in trouble with the law himself if he beat his son. Used to be you could beat your kid for doing something wrong, so long as the beating was in order with the "crime" and not "cruel and unusual." But now if you raise your hand to your kid, they slap the cuffs on you.

@LJ - good joke and it's not even April 1st .... I've been laughing SO hard ....

Back in the good old south west of England I have seen people openly smoking pot and being ignored by the police standing feet away. Unless you are unlucky enough to come across a particularly finicky policeman who's having a really bad day then you're going to be fine. Our government take an extremely hard line on pot (including the MPs who admit to having used it). Our scientists and police generally do not.

Under US law, a cop needs a "reasonable articulable suspicion" that a suspect is committing or has committed a crime to legally search you under the 4th Amendment. Smelling like pot is not a crime. But I think smelling like pot give the cop a reasonable suspicion to search to see if you are possessing pot (which is a crime in most places). In reality, the cop has a lot of discretion to decide whether or not to search you.

Citation: Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 21, 88 S.Ct. 1868 (1968). Hence, calling a stop and frisk a "Terry stop."

@LJ You're an asshole. Why would you stop your friend from doing something he would derive pleasure from? Not a very good friend you are. The form tackles probably caused more harm to him than the doobie would have.

@DJ: also, as an attorney who has represented kids charged with crimes, I feel for you. Kids (especially teenage boys) can be real cocky pricks. My best suggestion is to try and explain the negative consequences of his actions. Not sure where you live, but at least in the US, federal law says that if a kids is convicted for drug possession they are ineligible for federal student loans. Goodbye college unless you have rich parents. Likewise, having a drug conviction (yes, even pot) will often mean the best schools will reject you (I know someone who was rejected from several Ivy League schools for this exact reason--amazing grades, top 1% SATs, D-I athlete, but a pot conviction and he didn't get in to any of his top schools), and a lot of employers don't want to hire someone with a drug conviction. You can try and get it expunged if you are a kid, but it can be really hard depending on which state you are in.

The best advice I ever gave to any of the kids I've worked with is "don't be stupid." If you wanna smoke pot, I can't really stop you and that's your decision. But don't get in trouble. Be smart about it. Don't smoke in a car when driving around. Don't smoke in public. Don't buy your pot from a gangbanger. If you get caught, you have to live with the consequences.

...Gangbanger clearly means something different in the States to what it does in the UK. Either that or the method people use for buying pot over there is very open minded.

Lol @ Octavious. I think it means someone in a gang there :P

LOL, yes, gangbanger has nothing to do with gangbang here.

Yep, gangbanger in the States is a person involved in a gang, usually a violent one with guns (hence the bang).

So you're wondering if you'll get arrested for going around smelling like a pothead.

YOU SHULD REPENT YOUR SINS >_>

Well, regardless of the definition, I would think that DJ's son should not be buying pot from either form of a gangbanger. ;)

And yes, the term "gangbang" has the same meaning in the states, but I've never heard the term "gangbanger" for "one who participates in a gangbang." Yikes.

Those folks "across the pond" just love their gangbangs so much that they are participating in the all the time, therefore the participants are called gangbangers. Must be a way of life for them. :-)

Haha DJ, I know a lot of people like your son then. I think the number one line that will get you arrested is "Hey man, I know my rights!"

LJ, you were probably drunk then were you not? Nobody on pot is that violent, I'll tell you that. =P

Draug, are you sure the law actually prohibits parents from spanking their child? I'm pretty sure it's looked down upon, and you sure as hell can't beat the crap out of your child without risking legal repercussions but does that cover all sorts of physical punishment? A lot of these laws don't change fast enough to reflect social norms. I know that in Ontario technically teachers still retain the power to physically punish children it's just that the public teachers union makes it a contractual obligation to refrain from doing so. However, private school teachers still have the power, it's just never used simply because it's so frowned upon.

its definitely dependent on probable cause and what a police officer defines as the necessity to search. from everything ive experienced and seen, for the most part, cops leave someone high alone unless theres a greater thing going on. for example, i saw COPS on tv and a prostitute trying to buy crack gave someone money who then refused to give them the crack. the prostitute then stopped a cop so that he would get her money back. the cop could have arrested her because she admitted to trying to purchase an illegal substance but did not.

secondly, its a waste of time to bust small-time pot smokers in general because they alone could fill the local prisons and so unless theres something else going then i doubt smelling like pot would warrant anything. i have seen cops stop people that were coming from known drug areas late at night and stopped them for any simple reason because they suspected the individual possessed pot and purchased it from an area that frequently is caught selling it. in that case you're looking at a DUI, possible distribution if theres more than a certain amount, etc.

i guess the bottom line of what im getting down to is if youre walking around just smelling like pot then youre probably safe but if youre purchasing it or driving with it in your possession then they will be more likely to stop you.

Oh, to answer the original question, I do think the smell of pot can be used as PC. The officer in question would have to be pretty anti-pot or having a bad day to go after just a pothead, but it's certainly not unprecedented. Smoking pot doesn't nearly bother police as much as being obnoxious or openly defiant. You don't have to be doing anything wrong to get into trouble with the police if you're impudent.

" Smoking pot doesn't nearly bother police as much as being obnoxious or openly defiant"

ok now you understand why I made this thread.

If you smell like alcohol officers can question/search/arrest you. this is if you're out in public, or perhaps in the privacy of your moving car ;) so i think it is along the lines of that. course in a school they don't need probable cause. at least back in my highschool they didn't

if your kid acts the way you say he does then he'll set himself up. cops don't appreciate big mouthed children. if a cop smells weed on him, all they can do is pull him aside and question him. at that point the cop can say that your boy smelled of weed and looked high, but that isn't enough pc to search. if he shoots off his mouth though, he can get slapped with disorderly, and then he gets searched. a cop is not going to charge him unless he has multiple reasons (holds up better in court), and the initial charge is not always the one that he's going after.

if your kid's mouth writes checks his ass can't cash, your better off having him get busted then running into someone who pounds him into the ground, or worse. remember, cops do have rules, streetfights do not.

you're not your

no, your. it's possesive.

Does asking stupid questions give a police officer probably cause to shut your mouth?
Probably not but it should.

no, he'll probably just tell you to get lost

@akilies
streetfights should be two words. since YOU ARE keeping score.

@trip-
"if your kid's mouth writes checks his ass can't cash, your better off having him get busted"

the second your should be you're. unless i've forgotten all of my grammar lessons.

who said street fights?

ah, didn't see that one first time through.

i just figured since you're into correcting people's english, you'd want to know that there was a mistake that you missed.

haha, I mainly correct the dreaded your/you're mistakes

@ DBJ: i used to have friends years ago that did acid and so id like to share my personal story with you. it may lend some comfort, but it also may not.

anyhow, i had a friend who did acid and ive never done drugs. at a certain point in my life, i accepted Christ as my savior. ive never been a fan of drugs but even less so after being 'saved'. my buddy knew this since he and i were really close at the time. one night i was going to his house to hang out and when i got there, he was high as a kite. after he told me he was high, i left. he knew i wasnt coming back that night and it was going to ruin our friendship. later on, i told him that i hated that he did drugs and he asked me the question "why should you care, its my body and it doesnt hurt you." i answered and said that he was my friend and that if he knew how much i cared about him and valued our friendship then he would understand why i didnt want him doing drugs. he knew that if he didnt quit, then it was going to cost our friendship. thankfully for me, he valued our friendship enough that he quit.

it might be that he wont listen to certain people, but theres almost always someone that they will listen to. he might get mad, but being defensive is natural and im sure that later on he dwells on what is said. if what you say to him is sincere enough, or if he hears it sincerely from the right people, then he will think about things and may even change.

@DB: I've been that kind of kid (you probably were too though, or you wouldn't have one), and I'm raising one who has a similar attitude about authority. I managed to end up in jail WITHOUT doing drugs or drinking, which is harder than you might think.

You're doing a lot of things right already, and they aren't working. So I want to suggest a different approach that probably will seem unnatural: if he walks around smelling like pot, punish him as severely and swiftly.

Here's why: teenagers are even worse than most people at paying a short-term cost for a long-term benefit. Your son is getting something by being an idiot, and he's decided it's more important than his college admission, student loans, or whatever. So you need create a short-term cost so that he doesn't ruin his life.

The kicker is that you tell him what you're doing. For me, the explanation above would have worked: "you're not being smart enough on your own, so I have to substitute for your brain." I really wanted to be smart, and that would have gotten my attention. Some other kid might benefit from hearing that there's a difference between a good outlaw and a bad outlaw. If he's not a good enough criminal to get away with it, then he needs to follow the rules.

He might listen to you. But at worst--if he's 100% determined to have a pointless confrontation with authority--then at least you can let him have that confrontation with you instead of the judge. It will suck, but it will also help him in the long run.
Assume that he will never ever act like he's listening to you, but be sure that he is. Also, be prepared to follow through on the consequences, which will create an epic fight you'll remember for the rest of your life.