Parma v. Schoonover
2014 Ohio 400
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Scott Schoonover was charged in Parma Municipal Court with OVI-related offenses and filed a motion to suppress his breath-test results.
- Schoonover served a subpoena duces tecum on an Ohio Department of Health (ODH) employee seeking records related to an Intoxilyzer 8000 (serial no. 90-004181), with categories a–k of documents requested.
- ODH agreed to produce documents responsive to categories b–i but moved to quash categories a, j, and k (COBRA data and internal/third-party communications), arguing the subpoena was unreasonable or oppressive under Crim.R. 17(C).
- ODH relied on the four-factor Nixon/Potts test and requested an evidentiary hearing to establish whether the subpoena satisfied that test.
- The trial court denied ODH’s motion to quash without holding the required evidentiary hearing and ordered production; ODH appealed the denial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by denying ODH’s motion to quash without an evidentiary hearing under Nixon/Potts | ODH: Crim.R. 17(C) and Potts require an evidentiary hearing where the subpoena proponent must satisfy the Nixon four-factor test before documents from a non-party are ordered produced | Schoonover: (implicit) subpoena seeks relevant evidentiary material and trial court may order discovery to prepare suppression hearing | Court reversed: trial court abused its discretion by denying motion to quash without holding the required evidentiary hearing applying the Nixon factors; remanded for a hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Subpoena Duces Tecum Served upon Attorney Potts, 100 Ohio St.3d 97 (Ohio 2003) (trial court must hold an evidentiary hearing to apply Nixon factors to a Crim.R. 17(C) subpoena duces tecum)
- United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (U.S. 1974) (established four-part test for compelled production of documents)
- State v. Strickland, 183 Ohio App.3d 602 (Ohio Ct. App. 2009) (abuse-of-discretion standard for reviewing motions to quash subpoenas)
- State v. Vega, 12 Ohio St.3d 185 (Ohio 1984) (addresses limits on general attacks to breath testing reliability)