Test Your Knowledge on Cannabis Searches in a Vehicle
By Ray Hill
Professor Emeritus, Santa Rosa Junior College
1) The following are examples of legal cannabis possession, except:
A) Possession of one ounce or less of unsealed cannabis, inside a plastic bag in a shirt pocket, by a person over 21years of age at a public music festival.
B) Possession of one ounce or less of cannabis, by a person over 21 years of age, inside a vehicle being operated on the roadway, contained in a zipper bag which appears to have been opened, but then resealed.
C) Possession of one ounce or less of cannabis, by a person over 21 years of age, inside a motor vehicle being operated on the roadway, inside a baby food jar with a closed lid.
D) Possession of one ounce or less of cannabis, by a person 19 years of age, inside a motor vehicle being operated on the roadway, in a sealed zipper bag.
ANSWER (D). People under 21 years cannot legally possess cannabis (11362.1(a)(1) H&S).
2) The following would constitute a “closed or sealed” container of one ounce or less of cannabis inside a motor vehicle being operated on the roadway, except:
A) A plastic cigar tube capped at the top.
B) Two rolled “joints” partially concealed inside a glove on the dashboard.
C) A zipper bag, once opened, then resealed and closed at the top.
D) A prescription pill bottle capped at the top.
ANSWER (B). The cannabis is not in a “closed or sealed” container (23222(b)(1) V.C.; Peo. v. Fews (2018) 27 Cal. App.5th 553; In re: Randy C. (2024) 101 Cal. App. 5th 983).
3) You observe a rolled cannabis blunt (joint) on the console of a stopped vehicle. The amount of cannabis is under one ounce. Can a search for more cannabis be conducted?
A) Yes – The paper wrapping did not create a barrier to accessing the cannabis.
B) No – The blunt was sealed.
C) No – The blunt was too small to be considered an open container.
D) No –The amount of cannabis is insufficient for a search.
ANSWER (A). The paper wrapper around the blunt did not prevent access to the cannabis inside. It was an open container (In re: Randy C. (2024) 101 Cal. App.5th 937).
4) Which of the following situations would justify a probable cause search of a vehicle for cannabis?
A) A 21-year-old driver has a small amount of cannabis in a zipper bag, sealed at the top.
B) The vehicle interior smells of “freshly smoked” cannabis.
C) A 21-year-old passenger is possessing cannabis in a closed prescription bottle.
D) A 21-year-old driver is observed carrying a legal amount of cannabis in a public parking lot.
Answer (B). Probable cause for a vehicle search can be established if the odor of “freshly smoked” cannabis is detected. This indicates illegal use of cannabis while operating a vehicle on the roadway (Peo. v. Fews (2018) 27 Cal. App. 5th 553).
5) What is required for a lawful search of a vehicle based on the odor of cannabis?
A) Any odor of cannabis alone is enough to justify a search.
B) The odor must be “freshly burned,” indicating recent use.
C) The officer must also observe loose cannabis in plain view.
D) The driver must show the symptoms of driving under the influence of cannabis.
Answer (B). The smell of “freshly burned” cannabis is an indicator of illegal use which justifies a probable cause search. Explanation of an officer’s experience and training is important to include in an investigative report (Peo. v. Fews (2018) 27 Cal. App. 5th 553, U.S. v. Johnson (2019) 9th Circ. 913 F3d 793; Blakes v. Superior Court (2021) 72 Cal. App. 5th 904).
6) What is required to search a vehicle based on the observation of cannabis in a closed container?
A) The cannabis must exceed one ounce in quantity.
B) The container must not have been previously opened and resealed.
C) The cannabis must not have been commercially purchased.
D) There is some odor of prior cannabis use while operating the vehicle.
Answer: (A). A search is justified if the officer has probable cause that the quantity of cannabis exceeds the legal limit of one ounce, which would indicate illegal possession (11362(a)(7) Health and Safety Code; Peo. v. Moore (2021 64 Cal. App. 3d 291).
7) Which of the following statements is incorrect regarding cannabis possession and legal searches of vehicles in California?
A) Possession of one ounce or less of cannabis is permitted if the cannabis is in a closed prescription bottle.
B) Officers may search for cannabis if they smell “freshly burned” cannabis inside a vehicle.
C) Possession of one ounce of cannabis by a 19-year-old in a capped cigar tube.
D) A vehicle search is permitted based on the discovery of an ounce or less of cannabis in a previously opened plastic baggie, then knotted at the top.
Answer (D). A sealed zipper bag would not justify a search unless other signs of illegal activity are present (Peo. v. Johnson (2020) 50 Cal. App. 5th 620).
8) Which of the following is an example of an unlawful cannabis use that can justify a vehicle search?
A) The driver possesses cannabis inside a closed but easily opened prescription bottle.
B) The vehicle smells of the stale odor of cannabis.
C) The driver possesses two ounces of cannabis in a sealed bag.
D) The driver admits to smoking cannabis earlier in the day.
Answer: (C). Only an ounce or less of cannabis can be legally possessed (11362.1(c) H&S).
9) What is the significance of the term “closed or sealed” in relation to cannabis container searches?
A) It refers to a plastic bag tied with a knot at the top.
B) It includes a prescription bottle that can be easily opened but is capped.
C) It refers to containers that have been opened but are closed or sealed for future use.
D) All of the above.
Answer: (D). “Closed or sealed” refers to a container that, even if opened, is no longer accessible unless physically opened again. These containers are considered legal if no other illegal indicators exist (23222(b)(1) V.C.).
10) An officer observes loose cannabis and rolling materials on a tray on the backseat. There is also loose cannabis on the passenger seat floorboard. The amount is under one ounce. Is there probable cause to search for more cannabis in the passenger area?
A) No – There is no probable cause to search because the amount of cannabis observed was under one ounce.
B) Yes – The search is valid as incident to arrest.
C) Yes – The search was valid because the cannabis was not in a sealed container. There was probable cause more cannabis could be found in the passenger area.
D) A search would be invalid because there was no cannabis smell in the vehicle.
Answer (C). The combination of the visible loose cannabis, the rolling tray, the occupant’s nervous demeanor, and the false statements by the driver and passenger provided probable cause for a further search for cannabis (Sellers v. Superior Court (August 2024, 3DCA, 2024WL 3896784, 2024 Cal. App. Lexis 522).
11) What is the “automobile exception” to the warrant requirement?
A) It allows officers to search a vehicle as incident to arrest.
B) It allows officers to search a vehicle without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe evidence or contraband is contained within the vehicle.
C) It allows officers to search a vehicle after the driver consents.
D) It allows a search of a vehicle for evidence or contraband during an impound/inventory search.
Answer (B). The “automobile exception” allows for a warrantless search when there is probable cause to believe the vehicle contains evidence of a crime
How’d you do? We welcome your feedback and comments below.
