2011 Ohio 6791
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- May 20, 2010, at 1:41 a.m., police stopped Ware’s truck in the Big Lots parking lot in Brunswick, Ohio.
- Ware failed several field sobriety tests and was charged with two counts of driving while under the influence under Brunswick ordinances.
- Ware moved to suppress all evidence from the stop; hearing held October 6, 2010; suppression entered October 19, 2010.
- The City appealed, asserting the Medina Municipal Court erred in granting suppression.
- Officer Gagliardi testified the truck was parked near pallets in a closed store lot; Ware exited the lot as he approached.
- The appellate court held the officer had reasonable suspicion to justify the investigatory stop and reversed the suppression.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the stop supported by reasonable suspicion of criminal activity? | Ware argues there was no reasonable suspicion, only a hunch. | Gagliardi contends the totality of circumstances gave reasonable suspicion. | Yes; the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (Ohio 2003) (mixed law and fact; appellate deference to trial court findings on suppression)
- Maumee v. Weisner, 87 Ohio St.3d 295 (Ohio 1999) (reasonable suspicion required for investigative stops; totality of circumstances)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (establishes the reasonableness of stops based on specific and articulable facts)
- State v. Gedeon, 81 Ohio App.3d 617 (Ohio App.3d 1992) (need for reasonable suspicion before stop)
- State v. Carlson, 102 Ohio App.3d 585 (Ohio App.3d 1995) (reasonable suspicion concept in Ohio appellate review)
- State v. Bobo, 37 Ohio St.3d 177 (Ohio 1988) (framework for evaluating stop in light of totality of circumstances)
- Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1979) (random stops require reasonable suspicion or probable cause)