Barr was arrested for possession of less than two ounces of marijuana in Forney in 2009. Forney Police Officer Matthew Embry and Sergeant Curtis Stewart made a traffic stop on the car Barr was a passenger in, for failure to use a turn signal and running a red light. The driver, Tamara Overturf, turned out to have outstanding warrants for her arrest. She gave permission for the officers to search the car and said that nothing illegal was in her vehicle.
When the officers contacted Krystal Barr, she provided her ID. A computer check of Barr showed that she had a prior conviction for possessing an illegal substance. Forney PD Officer John Abernathy responded to the traffic stop as backup. He testified at the original trial that when he approached the vehicle he was able to smell a “strong odor of marijuana coming out of the vehicle.” Abernathy testified that “on the passenger side of the vehicle between the passenger seat and center console” he located a rolled-up joint that he believed to be marijuana. Overturf and Barr both denied it was their marijuana.
Both suspects were arrested and charged with possession of marijuana. When Officer Abernathy took inventory of suspect Barr's personal belongings, he found a small portion of a usable marijuana joint in her possession.
Barr was convicted in a Kaufman County court in April 2011 for possessing less than two ounces of marijuana. She was fined $200 and was given 7 days in jail. She appealed her conviction, arguing that the evidence against her should be suppressed because there was no probable cause to arrest her in the first place. She also appealed the fact that Officer Abernathy said he smelled marijuana in the suspect vehicle, because in the dash-cam video of the stop the officer never mentions smelling marijuana.
The 5th District Court found that there was in fact probable cause for her arrest and that Officer Abernathy's testimony to the smell of marijuana odor was credible. Justice Elizabeth Lang-Miers wrote the judgement stating, “We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying appellant's motion to suppress. We resolve appellant's issue against her and affirm the trial court's judgment.”
