Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Shariel Vasquez, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Xabdiel Padilla-Santiago

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Shariel Vasquez

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Xabdiel Padilla-Santiago

Criminal Action-Constitutional Law-Search and Seizure-Vehicle-Contents-Search Warrant-Exigency-Impoundment-Odor of Marijuana-Medical Marijuana-Vehicle Operator-Lack of Valid Operator’s Privileges

Shariel Vasquez and Xabdiel Padilla-Santiago (“Defendants”) were in possession of a vehicle in the parking lot after attempting to pass fraudulent money orders at a Walmart store.  When a law enforcement officer approached them, he detected an odor of marijuana and learned that neither person had a valid operator’s permit to operate the vehicle.  After impounding the vehicle and obtaining a search warrant for the vehicle, contraband was located and charges including Forgery, Theft by Deception and drug related offenses were lodged.  Defendants filed Omnibus Pretrial Motions to Suppress Evidence, arguing that the mere detection of the odor of marijuana no longer justifies further inquiry by law enforcement. 

1.  The general rule in Pennsylvania is that law enforcement should obtain a search warrant prior to searching a vehicle. 

2.  Law enforcement may not search and seize property from within a vehicle without probable cause and a qualifying exigency, such as the inherent mobility of the vehicle and a lack of sufficient time to obtain a warrant. 

3.  The court must consider the totality of the circumstances when determining whether probable cause exists for the issuance of a search warrant. 

4.  It is unlawful to smoke medical marijuana or to operate a vehicle under the influence of marijuana even if the operator is in possession of a lawful medical marijuana card.

5.  Where the law enforcement officer testified that the odor of marijuana was stronger than he ever had detected in his nineteen (19) years of experience when he approached the vehicle in question, neither of the Defendants possessed valid driver’s licenses to operate the vehicle in question that they did not own and the officer could not permit Defendants to drive the vehicle without valid operators’ privileges, impoundment of the vehicle to obtain a search warrant was lawful.

L.C.C.C.P. Nos. CP-38-CR-1055-2024 and CP-38-CR-1057-2024, Opinion by Bradford H. Charles, Judge, March 27, 2025.