01/16/2026
Florida’s Limits “Plain Smell” Cannabis Vehicle Searches
Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal has issued landmark decisions that significantly change when law enforcement may conduct a warrantless vehicle search based on the odor of cannabis. In Williams v. State (2025), the court held that the smell of cannabis alone is no longer sufficient to establish probable cause for a search.
This shift reflects major changes in Florida law, including the legalization of medical ma*****na and h**p, and has important implications for drivers and criminal defendants throughout the Second DCA.
What Changed in the Law?
For decades, Florida courts allowed police to search a vehicle based solely on an officer’s claim that they smelled ma*****na. The Second DCA has now recognized that this rule no longer aligns with current law.
Because legal h**p and lawful medical ma*****na are indistinguishable by smell alone, the court ruled that odor is no longer an “immediately apparent” indicator of criminal activity. Officers must now identify additional facts beyond odor to justify a warrantless search.
Key Case: Williams v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2025)
In Williams, the Second DCA held that:
• The odor of cannabis, by itself, does not establish probable cause
• Officers must rely on more than smell alone to conduct a vehicle search
Update: Cherfils v. State Clarifies the Rule
Later in Cherfils v. State (Dec. 31, 2025), the Second DCA applied the Williams decision and explained how courts will evaluate searches going forward.
The court reiterated that odor alone is insufficient, but held that a search may still be justified under the totality of the circumstances if additional facts support probable cause. Those facts may include:
• Statements made by the driver
• Behavior suggesting recent use in the vehicle
• Odor intensity indicating recent smoking
• Facts distinguishing h**p from medical ma*****na
A Critical Warning for Medical Ma*****na Patients
One important takeaway from these decisions is that what you say during a traffic stop matters.
In Cherfils, the court specifically noted that producing a medical ma*****na card and admitting to smoking were factors that supported probable cause. Florida law prohibits smoking medical ma*****na in a vehicle, even though h**p may be lawfully smoked.
Voluntarily identifying yourself as a medical ma*****na patient may eliminate lawful explanations for the odor and give law enforcement the additional facts needed to justify a search.
Why This Matters
For years, countless drivers were searched, arrested, and charged based solely on an officer’s claim that they smelled ma*****na. Under the new Second DCA framework:
• Odor alone is no longer enough
• Officers must articulate additional facts
• Suppression motions based on odor-only searches are now viable in appropriate cases
These changes create meaningful opportunities to challenge unlawful searches—but only if they are identified and raised early.
How Our Firm Can Help
At Lindsey, Ferry & Parker, P.A., we carefully review vehicle searches for constitutional violations and aggressively litigate motions to suppress when evidence is obtained unlawfully. That includes evaluating:
• The basis for the traffic stop
• The officer’s claimed observations
• Body camera footage and reports
• Whether probable cause existed under current Second DCA law
If you were searched during a traffic stop based on the smell of ma*****na—particularly after October 1, 2025—your case deserves careful legal review.
Contact our office to discuss your options.
