State v. Angers, 2021 Ohio 3640

At ~6:39 a.m. a gas-station clerk (Jaime Wick) called dispatch after observing Brian Angers stagger, smell of alcohol, tell her he was lost trying to get to Findlay, and then leave the store and drive away; she provided vehicle color, direction, and license plate number.
Dispatcher relayed the tip to Sgt. Kennedy; he located and stopped the vehicle on an overpass based on the dispatch information.
On initial contact officers did not immediately detect alcohol odor or obvious driving impairment; Kennedy asked another officer to check and then ordered Angers out of the car to perform field sobriety tests.
After removing his glasses for the HGN test, officers observed red/watery/bloodshot eyes, detected alcohol odor, observed 6/6 HGN clues, arrested Angers, and he later admitted he had been drinking the previous night.
Trial court denied Angers’s motion to suppress; Angers pled no contest, was convicted, appealed claiming (1) no reasonable suspicion for the stop and (2) no reasonable suspicion to expand the stop into an OVI investigation. The appellate court reversed: stop was justified, but ordering FSTs was not; conviction reversed and remanded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the traffic stop was supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion	Dispatcher/citizen tip (identified informant, contemporaneous, vehicle details, license) supplied reasonable suspicion to stop	Tip alone insufficient to justify stop	Stop was lawful — tip from identified, contemporaneous citizen informant had adequate indicia of reliability (overruled first assignment)
Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to expand the stop and order field sobriety tests	Clerk’s report plus: missed turn, nervousness (short answers/avoiding eye contact), odor of tobacco/urine (possible masking) justified further investigation	No observable indicia of impairment by officers before ordering FSTs; reliance on mere possibility of impairment insufficient	Expansion to FSTs was not supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion; suppression warranted (second assignment sustained)

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (establishes reasonable, articulable suspicion standard for brief investigatory stops)
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (U.S. 1967) (Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures)
Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (U.S. 1991) (Fourth Amendment reasonableness is the touchstone of searches and seizures)
Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1979) (vehicle stops constitute seizures under the Fourth Amendment)
Hensley v. United States, 469 U.S. 221 (U.S. 1985) (officers may rely on dispatches/flyers; validity depends on reliability of originators)
Maumee v. Weisner, 87 Ohio St.3d 295 (Ohio 1999) (where stop relies on dispatch, state must show facts precipitating dispatch justified reasonable suspicion)
State v. Bobo, 37 Ohio St.3d 177 (Ohio 1988) (defines reasonable, articulable suspicion in Ohio)
State v. Andrews, 57 Ohio St.3d 86 (Ohio 1991) (traffic stop requires reasonable, articulable suspicion that a crime has been or is being committed)
State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (Ohio 2003) (standard of review for suppression: factual findings deference, legal conclusions de novo)
State v. Batcheli, 113 Ohio St.3d 403 (Ohio 2007) (totality-of-the-circumstances review for informant tips)