Judge Suppresses Evidence in State College Marijuana Case
Posted in Fourth Amendment on July 6, 2025
A Centre County judge ruled that a vehicle stop and subsequent search of a vehicle were unconstitutional, resulting in the suppression of nearly an ounce of marijuana and related paraphernalia. The case, Commonwealth v. Max Jean, serves as a critical reminder of the legal protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, particularly when police rely on odor-based observations alone.
The Facts: Smell of Marijuana Triggers Two Separate Police Encounters
On January 26, 2018, around 1:00 a.m., an officerr from the State College Police Department was patrolling the 400 block of East Calder Way when he detected the odor of marijuana in the air. Tracking the scent to a tan sedan, he observed two individuals, including the Defendant, quickly exit the vehicle. One occupant shut the door on her coat in her haste.
The officer detained both individuals and conducted pat-down searches but found no contraband. Finding nothing overtly suspicious beyond the odor in the air, he released them. After they walked away, The officer peered into the sedan with a flashlight and observed what appeared to be a partially smoked marijuana cigarette, commonly called a “roach,” in plain view within the center console. Despite this, the officer left the scene to respond to another call and took no immediate action regarding the vehicle.
Roughly an hour later, at approximately 2:15 a.m., the officer encountered the same tan sedan traveling on Heister Street. He testified that, once again, he smelled the odor of marijuana, though he could not determine if it was burnt or unburnt. After following the vehicle for several blocks, the officer conducted a traffic stop of the vehicle on South Garner Street.
Three individuals, including the Defendant, were inside the car with the windows rolled up. The occupants initially refused to exit the vehicle until backup arrived. Upon arrival, a second officer detected the “undeniable odor of burnt marijuana” coming from the vehicle. A warranteless search of uncovered the partially smoked “roach” and 53.8 grams of unburnt marijuana, along with paraphernalia. Notably, the “roach” was photographed but neither tested for THC nor preserved as evidence.
The Legal Issue: Was There Reasonable Suspicion for the Vehicle Stop?
The Court identified two primary problems with the Commonwealth’s justification:
The “Roach” Observation: The “roach” was seen over an hour before the second stop. The lapse of time, coupled with the fact that the Defendant had left the vehicle during that period, undermined any reasonable belief that the Defendant was still in possession of the suspected marijuana.
The Odor of Burnt Marijuana: The only marijuana recovered from the vehicle was unburnt. The Court found no objective evidence—such as lab tests or confirmed contraband—to support the officers’ claim that burnt marijuana was emanating from the vehicle. Under Commonwealth v. Holmes, courts cannot rely solely on an officer’s bare testimony without corroborating evidence.
Conclusion: Evidence Suppressed Due to Unlawful Stop
The Court ruled that the Commonwealth failed to present sufficient, objective facts to establish reasonable suspicion for the second vehicle stop. As a result, the evidence recovered from the search—including the marijuana and paraphernalia—was suppressed.
This case underscores the vital role that constitutional protections play in traffic stops and searches. It also highlights the limitations of odor-based investigations when not supported by clear, articulable facts and objective evidence.
NOTE: This case pre-dates the PA Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Barr, which held that the odor of marijuana ALONE is not sufficient probable cause to criminal activity to justify a search. Here, there would be a strong argument that even if the officer had testified that he smelled unburnt marijuana coming from that car that there was sufficient reasonable suspicion to justify a traffic stop.
If you’ve been charged with a marijuana-related offense or your rights were potentially violated during a vehicle stop, consult an experienced criminal defense attorney to evaluate your case.
For a free case review, contact JD Law by email or leave a message at (814) 689-9139. Email is the preferred method of communication, as phone calls are directed to voicemail due to the high volume of spam and unsolicited calls.