Possessing a small amount of marijuana, even when illegal, is no longer enough to justify a warrantless vehicle search in Michigan, the state Supreme Court ruled.

In the 5-2 ruling issued July 22, the majority opinion said: probable cause to believe someone is committing a civil infraction “does not establish probable cause to conduct a warrantless search under the (Fourth Amendment) automobile exception.”

Michigan marijuana laws passed by voters in 2018 established that possession of less than five ounces of marijuana is at most a civil infraction and not criminal, except in cases of repeat offenses.

The court also ruled that “the smell of marijuana is not enough” to establish probable cause that there is a criminal amount of marijuana present. A 2025 state Supreme Court decision in People v. Armstrong previously overturned the long-standing rule that the smell of marijuana alone establishes probable cause to search a vehicle.

The underlying case in the most recent ruling involves a Jan. 16, 2023, traffic stop in Kent County. State police stopped Freddie Wilkins III for speeding and troopers smelled marijuana while approaching the vehicle, according to the Supreme Court summary of the case.

The passenger admitted to possessing marijuana “shake,” a term to describe remnants of marijuana flower.

Because it was illegal for either occupant—both of whom were under 21—to possess marijuana, the trooper argued he had probable cause to search the vehicle. During the search, he found a handgun in a backpack and prosecutors charged Wilkins with illegally carrying a concealed weapon in a vehicle, a felony.

In Kent County Circuit Court, Wilkins’ attorney argued the search was illegal, and therefore evidence of the discovery of the gun should be suppressed. The Circuit court rejected the argument and bound Wilkins over for trial. Wilkins appealed.

The state Court of Appeals later upheld the trial court’s decision, concluding the search was lawful. But in the July 22 ruling, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed both lower courts.

“The people of Michigan demonstrated a reduced state interest in enforcement of laws prohibiting marijuana possession and use when they took the offense out of the realm of criminal law,“ the majority opinion said. “Probable cause to believe only that a defendant is responsible for a civil infraction does not establish probable cause to conduct a warrantless search under the automobile exception.”

Joined by Justice Richard H. Bernstein, Justice Brian K. Zahra wrote a dissenting opinion arguing that it’s long been held that if there is evidence of contraband in a vehicle that it is subject to search.

“In holding otherwise, this court ignores over 100 years of precedent from the Supreme Court of the United States that has been followed by this court and incorporated into Michigan’s jurisprudence until today,” Zahra wrote.

Wilkins’ case is remanded to the Kent County Circuit Court.

MLive was unable to immediately reach Kent County Prosecutor Christopher R. Becker for comment on whether his office intends to continue pursuing the charge against Wilkins.

_____________

©2026 Advance Local Media LLC.

Visit mlive.com.

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.