People v. Olson, 25075

• Decision Date: 14 June 1971
• Docket Number: No. 25075,25075
• Citation: 485 P.2d 891,175 Colo. 140
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael R. OLSON, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Colorado Supreme Court

Page 891

485 P.2d 891

175 Colo. 140

The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael R. OLSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 25075.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

June 14, 1971.

David L. Wood, Dist. Atty., L. Duane Woodard, Deputy Dist. Atty., Fort Collins, for plaintiff-appellee.

Ronald H. Strahle, Donald J. Weinland, Fort Collins, for defendant-appellant.

LEE, Justice.

This is an interlocutory appeal for review of a trial court ruling denying a motion to suppress certain evidence seized by the police prior to and pursuant to a warrantless arrest for possession of marijuana. The evidence sought to be suppressed was a water pipe, a roach clip, and a bag of marijuana. We affirm the ruling of the trial court with respect to the bag of marijuana but reverse the ruling as it pertains to the water pipe and roach clip.

While on routine patrol between 6:00 and 6:30 p.m. on November 29, 1970, Officer Jordan of the Fort Collins police department noticed a parked car in downtown Fort Collins, containing one female and two male youths. As Jordan passed the car, he noticed that the three occupants stared at him, and his suspicion was aroused. He drove around the block and stopped behind the car. By this time the occupants of the car had gone.

Jordan left his patrol car to inspect the suspected vehicle. As he approached the vehicle, he smelled marijuana smoke. He opened the door of the car to make sure the odor was coming from that car. His suspicion was confirmed.

The only place of business is the immediate vicinity was a tavern across the street from the vehicle. Officer Jordan went into the tavern and saw the three suspects at the bar, drinking beer. Officer Jordan then arrested them for possession of marijuana.

Jordan radioed for assistance, and Officer Halls and Sergeant Mason, also of the Fort Collins police department, responded. Mason and Jordan searched to two male suspects but found no narcotics in their possession. After requesting that the suspects' car be inventoried and impounded, Officer Jordan took the three suspects to the police station.

Officers Halls and Mason then began inspecting the vehicle. Noting that the trunk and glove compartment were locked, Halls went to the police station and obtained the key from the female suspect. He returned to the car, and marijuana was found in both the trunk and glove box. The car was then towed away and impounded.

At the station, the three suspects were advised of their rights and questioned. The female suspect stated that the vehicle in question was owned by her boyfriend. A check was run on the license number, and ownership was determined to be in the defendant's name.

Halls and Bates, a narcotics investigator, went to the defendant's home. They parked in the rear of the house and Bates went to the front door and knocked. He was admitted and he thereupon arrested the defendant. In the meantime, Officer Halls had arrested another young man in the backyard. He brought this man back into the house by the back door, and they were met in the kitchen by Bates and the defendant. There, in open view, Bates observed the water pipe and roach clip, also sought to be suppressed in this case.

As a consequence of the foregoing events, defendant Olson was arrested and was charged by information in the district court with the felony offense of unlawful possession of a narcotic drug, cannabis sativa L.

I.

The trial court ruled that there was probable cause for the warrantless arrest of the three occupants of the vehicle in question and that the search of the vehicle was valid as an incident to such arrest. We agree.

The facts and circumstances within the knowledge of police Officer Jordan, as shown by the record, justified the trial court's conclusion that a rasonably cautious and prudent police officer would have reasonable grounds to believe that an offense had been committed for which an arrest could then be made without a warrant. The combination of the suspicious demeanor of the three occupants of the vehicle and the subsequent odor of marijuana emanating from within the car moments after the occupants had existed was a sufficient basis upon which to predicate probable cause for the belief that the offense of possession of marijuana had been recently committed. Fernandez v United States, 9 Cir., 321 F.2d 283; People v. Newman, 14 Cal.App.3d 246, 92 Cal.Rptr. 205; People v. Christensen, 2 Cal.App.3d 546, 83 Cal.Rptr. 17; People v. Erb, 128 Ill.App.2d 126, 261 N.E.2d 431. The search of the vehicle, which was made substantially contemporaneously with the arrest, was permissible as an incident to such arrest. Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42, 90 S.Ct. 1975, 26 L.Ed.2d 419; People v. Mojo, Colo., 480 P.2d 571; People v. Clark, Colo., 476 P.2d 564. Additionally, as was stated in People v. Clark, Supra, the circumstances justifying the arrest are also those furnishing probable...