State v. Torgerson, A22-0425 (Minn. Sept. 13, 2023)
This training update was written for the Minnesota Law Enforcement Training Academy (LETAC) and will be distributed to 12,000 Minnesota law enforcement professionals.
Yes, Officer, I was smoking marijuana but it was earlier at my house, not in the car!
QUESTION:Does the odor of marijuana, alone, emanating from a vehicle give officers “probable cause” to conduct a warrantless search of the vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement?
SHORT ANSWER – NO, Not Anymore!The Minnesota Supreme Court recently answered this question in State v. Torgerson. This newly clarified rule states:
NEW RULE: The odor of marijuana emanating from a vehicle, alone, is insufficient to create the requisite “probable cause” to search a vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement.
HOWEVER,
The odor of marijuana should be considered, along with the totality of all other circumstances, to determine whether there is “probable cause” to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle.
In other words, to establish “probable cause,” the totality of the circumstances (e.g., the odor of marijuana plus additional factors) must create a “fair probability” that marijuana is being possessed or used in a criminally illegal manner.
Read the full training update below for an analysis of the Torgerson decision, a summary of the August 1, 2023, recreational marijuana legislation, and a list of ten law enforcement “Best Practices” for determining probable cause.
Click below for a print-ready copy of Training Update 23-3
Law Enforcement officers are responsible for conducting traffic stops when they have reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation or a criminal violation. Being stopped by an officer can be a stressful experience for the driver, any passengers, and the officer, too. Knowing what to do during the stop will help ensure the safety of the driver and the safety of others.
If you get pulled over by a police officer while driving, it’s important that you not only know what you should do but also what you should not do. And, of course, every driver should have a basic understanding of what their rights are. This training update will address three (3) important topics:
Steps To Take Before You Are Stopped By The Police;
Steps To Take If You Are Being Pulled Over By The Police;
IMPORTANT: During The Stop Follow These Basic Rules;
This Training Update will also introduce an innovative On-Demand Lawyer App that every driver (and parents of young drivers) should be aware of. The TURNSIGNL mobile On-Demand Lawyer App won the prestigious 2022 American Bar Association New Technology Award.
The TurnSignl mobile App provides 24/7/365 on-demand teleconferencing with attorneys during traffic stops and after car accidents with the driver’s cell phone camera automatically recording the interaction. TurnSignl’s mission is to protect driver’s civil rights, de-escalate roadside interactions, and ensure drivers and law enforcement officers return home safely, focusing on marginalized communities including non-white and LGBTQ+ individuals.
The Minnesota Dimler Amendment, originally enacted in 1986 and named after its sponsor, representative Chuck Dimler, governs which speeding violations are recorded on a driving record maintained by the Department of Public Safety. Application of the Dimler Amendment not only keeps a driving infraction off a person’s driving record but has the practical effect of insulating a driver’s insurance company from being notified of the speeding ticket.
This training update discusses everything you need to know about using the Dimler Amendment to keep a traffic ticket off your driving record.
Click on this Link for a print ready copy of my newest training update on the Dimler Amendment:
This educational series is sponsored by AutoGrabBag.com, a faith-based small business car accessory gift store.
This is the 2nd post of a 45 post United States Supreme Court Series designed to provide short educational summaries of the 45 most significant Supreme Court decisions ever issued. I encourage you to share these posts with anyone you think might benefit from them.
Note: You can receive email notifications for all upcoming posts by clicking on PendletonUpdates and adding your email under the “Subscribe” button.
Key Questions: Was it within New York State’s rights to issue laws regarding navigation within its jurisdiction, or does the Commerce Clause give Congress authority over interstate navigation?
Unanimous Decision: Justices Marshall, Washington, Todd, Duvall, and Story (Justice Thompson abstained)
Ruling: As interstate navigation fell under interstate commerce, New York could not interfere with it, and the law was therefore invalid.
Circumstances of Gibbons v. Ogden
In 1808, the state government of New York awarded a private transport company a virtual monopoly to operate its steamboats on the state’s rivers and lakes, including rivers that ran between New York and adjoining states.
This state-sanctioned steamboat company granted Aaron Ogden a license to operate steamboats between Elizabethtown Point in New Jersey and New York City. As one of Ogden’s business partners, Thomas Gibbons, operated his steamboats along the same route under a federal coasting license issued to him by an act of Congress.
The Gibbons-Ogden partnership ended in dispute when Ogden claimed that Gibbons was undercutting their business by unfairly competing with him.
Ogden filed a complaint in the New York Court of Errors seeking to stop Gibbons from operating his boats. Ogden argued that the license granted to him by the New York monopoly was valid and enforceable even though he operated his boats on shared, interstate waters. Gibbons disagreed arguing that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the sole power over interstate commerce.
The Court of Errors sided with Ogden. After losing his case in another New York court, Gibbons appealed the case to the Supreme Court, which ruled that the Constitution grants the federal government the overriding power to regulate how interstate commerce is conducted.
Some of the Parties Involved
The case of Gibbons v. Ogden was argued and decided by some of the most iconic lawyers and jurists in U.S. history. Exiled Irish patriot Thomas Addis Emmet and Thomas J. Oakley represented Ogden, while U.S. Attorney General William Wirt and Daniel Webster argued for Gibbons.
The decision of the Supreme Court was written and delivered by America’s fourth Chief Justice John Marshall.
“. . . Rivers and bays, in many cases, form the divisions between States; and thence it was obvious, that if the States should make regulations for the navigation of these waters, and such regulations should be repugnant and hostile, embarrassment would necessarily happen to the general intercourse of the community. Such events had actually occurred, and had created the existing state of things.”
— John Marshall — Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
The Decision
In its unanimous decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress alone had the power to regulate interstate and coastal trade.
The decision answered two pivotal questions about the Constitution’s Commerce Clause: First, exactly what constituted “commerce?” And, what did the term “among the several states” mean?
The Court held that “commerce” is the actual trade of commodities, including the commercial transportation of commodities using navigation. Also, the word “among” meant “intermingled with” or cases in which one or more states had an active interest in the commerce involved.
Siding with Gibbons, the decision read, in part:
“If, as has always been understood, the sovereignty of Congress, though limited to specified objects, is plenary as to those objects, the power over commerce with foreign nations and among the several states is vested in Congress as absolutely as it would be in a single government, having in its constitution the same restrictions on the exercise of the power as are found in the Constitution of the United States.”
The Significance of Gibbons v. Ogden
Decided 35 years after the ratification of the Constitution, the case of Gibbons v. Ogden represented a significant expansion of the power of the federal government to address issues involving U.S. domestic policy and the rights of the states.
The Articles of Confederation had left the national government virtually powerless to enact policies or regulations dealing with the actions of the states. In the Constitution, the framers included the Commerce Clause in the Constitution to address this problem.
Though the Commerce Clause gave Congress some power over commerce, it was unclear just how much. The Gibbons decision clarified some of these issues.
In the long run, Gibbons v. Ogden would be used to justify the future expansion of congressional power to control not only commercial activity but a vast range of activities previously thought to be under the exclusive control of the states. Gibbons v. Ogden gave Congress the preemptive power over the states to regulate any aspect of commerce involving the crossing of state lines. As a result of Gibbons, any state law regulating in-state commercial activities—such as the minimum wage paid to workers in an in-state factory—can be overturned by Congress if, for example, the factory’s products are also sold in other states. In this manner, Gibbons is often cited as justification for the enactment and enforcement of federal laws regulating the sale of firearms and ammunition.
Perhaps more than any case in the history of the Supreme Court, Gibbons v. Ogden set the stage for massive growth in the power of the federal government during the 20th century.
John Marshall’s Role
In his opinion, Chief Justice John Marshall provided a clear definition of the word “commerce” and the meaning of the term, “among the several states” in the Commerce Clause. Today, Marshall’s is regarded as the most influential opinions concerning this key clause.
“… Few things were better known, than the immediate causes which led to the adoption of the present constitution … that the prevailing motive was to regulate commerce; to rescue it from the embarrassing and destructive consequences, resulting from the legislation of so many different States, and to place it under the protection of a uniform law.”—John Marshall—Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
This educational series is sponsored by AutoGrabBag.com, a faith-based small business car accessory gift store.
This Supreme Court Series will present brief summaries of 45 of the Court’s most impactful decisions. This educational series is intended for everyone, not just law students, attorneys or judges. Every person that graduates from our public education system should have a basic working knowledge of the United States Supreme Court and at least some of these 45 landmark decisions, unfortunately, most do not.
Each of the blog posts in this series will be short and succinct, capable of being read within 5 minutes (short enough for even the most distracted teenager). This first post, however, will be a bit longer because it includes some basic Supreme Court background information. I encourage you to share these posts with anyone you think might benefit from them.
Note: You can receive email notifications for all upcoming posts by clicking on PendletonUpdates and adding your email under the “Subscribe” button.
The US Supreme Court was formed in 1789. It’s gone from 5 seats to 10, and is now fixed at 9.
It makes fewer than 100 decisions every year, but its choices have had a huge impact on the country.
Some decisions have changed race relations for the better, empowered women, helped protect the environment, or guaranteed a person’s right to expression. Not every decision has aged well. Some decisions have strengthened racist laws, enabled forced sterilization, and allowed unequal schooling.
Supreme Court Background
Article III of the Constitution establishes the federal judiciary. Article III, Section I states that “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” Although the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court, it permits Congress to decide how to organize it. Congress first exercised this power in the Judiciary Act of 1789. This Act created a Supreme Court with six justices. It also established the lower federal court system.
The Justices
Over the years, various Acts of Congress have altered the number of seats on the Supreme Court, from a low of five to a high of 10. Shortly after the Civil War, the number of seats on the Court was fixed at nine. Today, there is one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices of the United States Supreme Court. Like all federal judges, justices are appointed by the President and are confirmed by the Senate. They, typically, hold office for life. These restrictions are meant to protect the independence of the judiciary from the political branches of government.
The Court’s Jurisdiction
Article III, Section II of the Constitution establishes the jurisdiction (legal ability to hear a case) of the Supreme Court. The Court has original jurisdiction (a case is tried before the Court) over certain cases, e.g., suits between two or more states and/or cases involving ambassadors and other public ministers. The Court has appellate jurisdiction (the Court can hear the case on appeal) on almost any other case that involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law. Some examples include cases to which the United States is a party, cases involving Treaties, and cases involving ships on the high seas and navigable waterways (admiralty cases).
Cases
When exercising its appellate jurisdiction, the Court, with a few exceptions, does not have to hear a case. The Certiorari Act of 1925 gives the Court the discretion to decide whether or not to do so. In a petition for a writ of certiorari, a party asks the Court to review its case. The Supreme Court agrees to hear about 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year.
Role
The Supreme Court plays a very important role in our constitutional system of government. First, as the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those looking for justice. Second, due to its power of judicial review (explained below), it plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power. Third, it protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm and/or take undue advantage of unpopular minorities. In essence, it serves to ensure that the changing views of a majority do not undermine the fundamental values common to all Americans, i.e., freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and due process of law.
Judicial Review
The best-known power of the Supreme Court is judicial review, or the ability of the Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, is not found within the text of the Constitution itself. The Court established this doctrine in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803).
The case: Before President Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801, lame duck John Adams and Congress created new courts and appointed dozens of judges, including William Marbury as Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia. But the new administration’s Secretary of State James Madison wouldn’t validate the appointment. So Marbury sued.
The decision: The justices ruled unanimously that Madison’s refusal to validate the appointment was unlawful, but did not order Madison to hand over Marbury’s appointment commission via writ of mandamus (i.e. a court order which requires a party to perform a specific act required by law) because the law Marbury had sued under was also unconstitutional. The Court held that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 enabling Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional, since it purported to extend the Court’s original jurisdiction beyond that which Article III, Section 2, established.
Chief Justice Marshall ruled that a writ of mandamus was the proper way to seek a remedy, but concluded that the Supreme Court could not issue it. Marshall reasoned that the Judiciary Act of 1789 (a congressional law) conflicted with the Constitution. Congress did not have power to modify the Constitution through regular legislation because the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause places the Constitution before the laws.
More importantly, this ruling held that the Supreme Court had the power of “judicial review” to decide whether a law or executive action is constitutional. This essentially gave the high court the legal authority for every decision it would make in the future (i.e. the power to declare a law unconstitutional).
DISCLAIMER: These resources are created by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for educational purposes only. They may not reflect the current state of the law, and are not intended to provide legal advice, guidance on litigation, or commentary on any pending case or legislation.
Two weeks ago I posted a copy of my new eBook on “Artificial Intelligence in Law: A Comprehensive Introduction for Legal Professionals”.
Since then I have received numerous comments that the book font was difficult to read. One benefit of an eBook is the ease with which it can be edited. I have reformatted the entire book with a more user-friendly font. I also added several additional pages to Chapter 7.
Although the eBook is copyrighted please feel free to distribute the book to anyone you think might benefit from it.
Welcome to “Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Comprehensive Introduction for Legal Professionals,” an eBook dedicated to unveiling the transformative role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the legal domain.
As the legal profession stands at the cusp of a technological revolution, integrating AI into various aspects of legal practice is not just imminent but essential.
This eBook aims to serve as a guiding beacon for attorneys, law students, and legal professionals who seek to understand, adapt, and harness the power of AI in their professional lives.
This eBook will soon be listed for sale on Amazon and a number of other online bookstores. I am pre-distributing the book to all subscribers of this training site in the hope you can use it to better understand and embrace the world of AI in law.
Message From Site Manager Alan Pendleton (former district court judge)
This training site contains the complete repository of "Pendleton Judicial Training Updates". Training Updates are designed to be short, concise, easy-to-read judicial tips that every judge and attorney should know.
Judicial Training Updates are listed under TABLE OF CONTENTS and SUBJECT MATTER INDEX above and CATEGORIES below. The five most recent Updates are posted to the left.
JUDICIAL RESOURCE LIBRARY: This Blog also serves as a one-stop judicial resource library with hyperlinks to numerous legal research and reference sites.
NATIONAL RECOGNITION: From a field of more than 2,000 legal blogs, the Minnesota Judicial Training & Education Blog placed second in the highly competitive education category of the Expert Institute's Best Legal Blog National Competition.
ADD YOUR EMAIL BELOW AND RECEIVE A NOTIFICATION WHENEVER A NEW UPDATE IS POSTED.