HTTP/1.0 200 OK Content-Type: text/html
Pubdate: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 Source: National Post (Canada) Copyright: 2008 Southam Inc. Contact: http://www.nationalpost.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/286 Author: Matt Kruchak, Canwest News Service Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Marijuana - Canada) SMELL OF BURNT POT NOT ENOUGH FOR ARREST: COURT SASKATOON - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has upheld a decision stating the smell of burnt marijuana isn't enough evidence to arrest someone for possession of the drug, and then search his or her vehicle without a warrant. The ruling in centred around the case of Archibald Janvier. Four years ago he was driving in La Loche, Sask., when he was pulled over by an RCMP officer because his truck had a broken headlight. The officer approached the vehicle and smelled marijuana smoke. Mr. Janvier was arrested for possession of marijuana based on the smell. The officer then searched the vehicle and found eight grams of the drug and what was thought to be a list of contacts -- which led to Mr. Janvier also being charged. The case went to trial and the judge found Mr. Janvier's Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure had been violated. The judge excluded the evidence and Mr. Janvier was declared not guilty. "The smell alone can't constitute the grounds, because the smell of burnt marijuana -- as opposed to raw marijuana -- gives an inference that the material is gone, it's dissipated into the atmosphere. So how can you say you're in possession of something that doesn't exist?" said Ronald Piche, Mr. Janvier's lawyer. "There may be suspicion that the person is in possession of marijuana, but that's not enough to base an arrest." The Crown appealed the decision and the trial judge's decision was upheld. "Until now, police have used smell of marijuana as reasonable grounds to arrest someone for possession of marijuana," Mr. Piche said. "It always struck me as a little thin, frankly. It's frankly a lazy officer's way of giving out a warrant, and getting to check a vehicle out." Mr. Piche said the decision is encouraging, because the province's highest court has taken a liberal interpretation of this law. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake