State v. Arnold
2017 Ohio 559
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Victor Arnold, Jr. pleaded no contest to third-degree felonies: possession of heroin and having weapons while under disability; sentenced to two consecutive 3-year terms (6 years total).
- Police obtained a search warrant for Arnold’s home at 512 E. Rose St. based on a 30-paragraph affidavit by Detective Mitchell describing prior convictions, confidential informant tips (multiple CIs and an identified CS), anonymous tips about sales at the Rose Street address, phone-record connections, vehicle observations, and surveillance showing Arnold meeting with occupants of vehicles from the alley behind the house in July 2015.
- Defense moved to suppress, arguing the affidavit relied on stale information, unreliable anonymous/confidential informants, lack of corroboration tying Arnold to phone numbers/vehicles, and that observed conduct could be innocent.
- The trial court denied the suppression motion, finding the affidavit provided probable cause; Arnold appealed that denial.
- The appellate court reviewed under the deferential standard (whether the issuing magistrate had a substantial basis for finding probable cause) and also noted the good-faith exception as an alternative argument.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrant affidavit established probable cause to search 512 E. Rose St. | The affidavit’s totality (informant tips, surveillance, prior convictions, corroboration) gave a fair probability drugs were at the address. | Affidavit lacked timely, corroborated facts; many tips were stale or anonymous and failed to tie drugs to the residence. | Warrant upheld: magistrate had a substantial basis to find probable cause. |
| Staleness of information | The affidavit included recent (July 2015) corroborative observations and surveillance showing hand-to-vehicle contacts, making earlier history relevant background. | Much of the affidavit recited older events and informant reports from 2013–2014 that were stale and insufficient to show contraband remained. | Court concluded timely July 2015 surveillance coupled with informant/anonymous tips overcame staleness concerns. |
| Reliability and corroboration of informants/anonymous tips | Some sources (CS #1289) had prior verified reliability; police independently corroborated key details (address, vehicles, surveillance matching CI descriptions). | Several tips were anonymous or from first-time CIs without demonstrated basis of knowledge; phone numbers and vehicle links lacked direct proof. | Court held that combined indicia (verified CS, independent police corroboration, surveillance) supported credibility under the Gates totality-of-the-circumstances. |
| Good-faith reliance on warrant | N/A (State alternative) | N/A | Although unnecessary, court noted officers would have been protected by the good-faith exception if probable cause were deficient. |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (establishes totality-of-circumstances test for informant tips and probable cause)
- State v. George, 45 Ohio St.3d 325 (Ohio standard: reviewing courts ensure magistrate had substantial basis for probable cause)
- State v. Roberts, 62 Ohio St.2d 170 (presumption of validity for affidavits supporting search warrants)
- Sgro v. United States, 287 U.S. 206 (staleness requires facts closely related in time to justify probable cause)