Aldama v. State
The Third DCA affirmed the denial of a motion to suppress a firearm found during a vehicle search, holding that even under the post-hemp-legalization landscape, probable cause existed where troopers smelled marijuana and then specifically asked the defendant whether he had a medical marijuana card or whether the substance was hemp, and he denied both. The court declined to resolve the broader question of whether odor alone still suffices for probable cause (as split between Owens and the Hatcher concurrence), instead resting its holding on the 'odor-plus' rationale that questioning eliminated all lawful explanations for the smell.
Key facts
- Defendant was stopped and troopers smelled marijuana during a vehicle stop.
- Troopers asked defendant whether he possessed a medical marijuana card or hemp; defendant denied both.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision is useful to practitioners litigating suppression motions in the post-medical-marijuana/hemp-legalization era, illustrating how law enforcement questioning about medical marijuana cards or hemp can satisfy… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.