California Legal Brief

The Rule of Sellers v. Superior Court is that to violate Health and Safety Code section 11362.3, subdivision (a)(4) (open container of marijuana in vehicle), marijuana must be of a usable quantity, in imminently usable condition, and readily accessible to an occupant, under circumstances where the marijuana could be consumed with minimal effort while driving, operating, or riding in the vehicle.

Appeal from order denying motion to suppress evidence in Sacramento County Superior Court.

Defendant Appellant was Davonyae Sellers — the front passenger in a vehicle searched after a traffic stop who moved to suppress evidence of an unregistered pistol found during the search.

Real Party in Interest Respondent was The People — prosecuting Sellers for unlawful possession of a firearm by a person previously adjudged a ward of the juvenile court.

The suit sounded in criminal law/Fourth Amendment search and seizure.

The key substantive facts leading to the suit were: Officers stopped a vehicle for failure to stop fully behind the crosswalk limit line. Three officers approached and saw a rolling tray on the backseat and 0.36 grams of loose marijuana "crumbs" scattered on the rear floorboard behind and under the passenger seat. The officers had the occupants exit and searched the vehicle, finding an unregistered pistol near the front passenger seat. There was no suspicion of impaired driving, no paraphernalia to facilitate marijuana consumption, and the scattered marijuana was not readily accessible to the front-seat occupants.

The procedural result leading to the Appeal: The trial court denied the motion to suppress, ruling that the search was supported by probable cause based solely on the marijuana crumbs constituting "contraband" under the open container law.

The key question(s) on Appeal: 1. Whether a small amount of loose marijuana scattered on a vehicle floor violates Health and Safety Code section 11362.3, subdivision (a)(4). 2. Whether officers had probable cause to conduct a warrantless vehicle search under the totality of circumstances.

The Appellate Court held that scattered marijuana crumbs on a rear floorboard do not violate the open container statute because they were neither imminently usable nor readily accessible to vehicle occupants, and that officers lacked probable cause to search the vehicle based on lawful marijuana-related conduct combined with ordinary nervousness during a police encounter.

The case is inapplicable when marijuana in a vehicle is of a usable quantity, in imminently usable condition (such as rolled into a cigarette or prepared for smoking), readily accessible to occupants, and paraphernalia is present that could facilitate consumption with minimal effort.

The case leaves open the precise threshold for determining what constitutes a "usable quantity" of marijuana and the specific factual circumstances that would establish "imminent usability" and "ready accessibility" in various vehicle configurations and marijuana preparations.