Commonwealth v. Pacheco (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-060-13)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us SJC‑11216 COMMONWEALTH vs. ANTONIO L. PACHECO. Essex. December 6, 2012. ‑ April 5, 2013. Present: Ireland, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Gants, Duffly, & Lenk, JJ. Firearms. Constitutional Law, Search and seizure. Search and Seizure, Motor vehicle, Threshold police inquiry, Probable cause. Threshold Police Inquiry. Probable Cause. Evidence, Firearm. Complaint received and sworn to in the Lynn Division of the District Court Department on March 2, 2011. A pretrial motion to suppress evidence was heard by Stacey Fortes‑White, J. An application for leave to prosecute an interlocutory appeal was allowed by Gants, J., in the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Suffolk, and the case was reported by him to the Appeals Court. The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review. Paul R. Rudof, Committee for Public Counsel Services (Tracy Walts, Committee for Public Counsel Services, with him) for the defendant. Ronald DeRosa, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. Michael D. Cutler & Steven S. Epstein, for National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, amicus curiae, submitted a brief. Ezekiel Edwards, of New York, Matthew R. Segal, & Alex G. Philipson, for American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts & another, amici curiae, submitted a brief. DUFFLY, J. The defendant appeals from the denial of his motion to suppress a firearm and other evidence found in a backpack in the trunk of a vehicle that had been stopped by a State trooper. A District Court judge determined that, after the trooper smelled freshly burnt marijuana and was directed to a small bag of marijuana on the floor of the vehicle, occupied by the defendant and four others, he had probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed and that evidence of that crime could be found in the trunk.[1] A single justice of this court allowed the defendant’s application for leave to file an interlocutory appeal in the Appeals Court pursuant to Mass. R. Crim. P. 15 (a) (2), as appearing in 422 Mass. 1501 (1996). We granted the defendant’s application for direct appellate review. Considering this case in conjunction with our decisions in Commonwealth v. Jackson, ante , (2013), and Commonwealth v. Daniel, ante , (2013), we conclude that the trooper did not have probable cause to believe that a criminal […]