The Utah Supreme Court has rejected a police department's explanation that drug suspects were "smokin' up the evidence" to justify the warrantless search of a trailer.

In a 4-1 decision, the state's high court upheld a Utah Court of Appeals decision that found the odor of marijuana smoke did not justify police entry into private property without a warrant.

The case involves a drug bust at a trailer near Price in April 2003. Police were called by people complaining that Bernadette Duran and her friends were smoking marijuana and that the trailer's owner, who was away at the time, had guns on the premises and had threatened to use them against police.

When officers arrived, they reported smelling burning marijuana "leakin' out of the cracks of the trailer" and concluded that the suspects were "in the very process of smokin' up the evidence." Feeling justified that evidence was being destroyed and that time was of the essence, officers entered the trailer without a warrant.

In its ruling issued Friday, the court found there was no evidence that Duran knew police were outside when she and her friends were smoking marijuana.

Duran moved to have drug evidence seized in the search thrown out, but a 7th District judge refused her request. On appeal, the Utah Court of Appeals overturned the lower court's decision, finding the officers' actions violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure.

In the ruling, the justices state they have sustained warrantless entries in cases where evidence might be destroyed or removed if there was a delay. "We find, however, that the detectable odor of burning marijuana is inadequate, standing alone, to support such a reasonable belief," the ruling states.

Casual consumption of marijuana, such as smoking it, cannot be interpreted by police as destroying evidence to avoid prosecution, the justices concluded. Justices stated they were also concerned with officers "exploiting the rationale" to justify warrantless searches.

Justice Michael Wilkins, however, dissented from the majority opinion. He stated that given indications of guns in the trailer and the smell of drugs being used, he felt the search was reasonable.

"Protecting the rights of citizens does not necessarily require the handcuffing of police," Wilkins stated.

---

E-mail: gfattah@desnews.com