With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". United States Supreme Court in Gates that “probable cause requires only a probability or substantial chance of criminal activity, not an actual showing of such activity.” Gates, 462 U.S. at 244 n. 13, 103 S.Ct. 2317. Looking at what the officers knew in the instant case, there was certainly a “probability or substantial chance” that appellant was the driver of the car that killed Mark Yates. Probable cause is not the same as beyond a reasonable doubt. Law enforcement was not required to know with out a doubt that appellant was the driver of the car in order to take the blood sample from him. Appellant’s suggestion that law enforcement officers cannot have probable cause to search multiple suspects has been rejected by this court. See State v. Hernandez, 706 So.2d 66 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>). The smell of alcohol on appellant’s breath,

A: holding that if an officer smells the odor of marijuana in circumstances where the officer can localize its source to a person the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed or is committing the crime of possession of marijuana and thus has authority to arrest him without a warrant in a public place
B: holding that the smell of marijuana gave the police probable cause to search the vehicle
C: holding in the context of vehicular searches that the fact that cm agent familiar with the odor of marijuana smelled such an odor emanating from an automobile  alone was sufficient to constitute probable cause for a subsequent search for marijuana
D: holding that the odor of marijuana gave officers probable cause to believe members of a group possessed marijuana and therefore a search of each person present was proper
D.