STATE v. JARQUIN (2025)

Writ granted. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the odor of marijuana alone shall not provide a law enforcement officer with probable cause to conduct a search without a warrant of a person's place of residence. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 162.4. (Emphasis added). Upon detecting the odor of marijuana emanating from inside the residence, the officers herein decided to obtain a search warrant. Although the officers proceeded to conduct an unlawful “protective sweep” before the search warrant was issued, and included evidence discovered in plain view during the “protective sweep,” the smell of marijuana alone is sufficient probable cause to support the issuance of the search warrant. See, e.g., United States v Thurman, No. 21-30450, 2022 WL 2805147, at *5 (5th Cir. 7/18/22)(“excluding the [information gained from] the protective sweeps, the search warrant's reference to the smell of marijuana emitting from the [apartment] unit supported probable cause”); State v. Robertson, No. 2014-KA-0252, 2014 WL 4668685, at *5 (La. App. 1 Cir. 9/19/14), (officer had probable cause “when he detected the odor of marijuana as [the defendant's girlfriend] opened the door.”) The appellate court erred in granting the defendant's writ and motion to suppress. The judgment of the court of appeal is vacated, the district court's judgment denying the motion to suppress is reinstated, and this matter is remanded for further proceedings.

WRIT GRANTED; MOTION TO SUPPRESS DENIED; REMANDED.

PER CURIAM

Weimer, C.J., dissents and would grant and docket. Griffin, J., dissents and would grant and docket. Guidry, J., dissents and would grant and docket.