Court Opinion

ID: 9545556
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:15:37.956702+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:15:07.475488
License: Public Domain

RANSOM, Justice (specially concurring). I concur only in the result of the majority opinion. We should avoid confusion between warrantless searches incident to an arrest, and warrantless searches of automobiles based on probable cause arising from observation of paraphernalia. Rather than to rely on the arrest cases cited in the majority opinion (People v. Jenkins, 77 A.D.2d 353, 432 N.Y.S.2d 956 (1980), and State v. Durell, 111 R.I. 582, 305 A.2d 104 (1973)), I specially concur in reliance upon cases that hold there is probable cause to conclude small amounts of contraband might be in the passenger compartment of a vehicle when a police officer observes drug paraphernalia that, based on the officer’s training, shows signs of illegal use. See Garrett v. Goodwin, 569 F.Supp. 106, 120 (E.D.Ark.1982); People v. Superior Court, 8 Cal.App.3d 398, 87 Cal.Rptr. 283 (1970). In my opinion, the reasoning of these cases applies equally when a reliable field test of residue is positive for marijuana.