State v. Asp
2011 Ohio 4567
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Trooper Allar observed a vehicle exceed the speed limit on U.S. Route 40 in Guernsey County at 64 mph (posted 55 mph).
- Speed was confirmed by K-55 radar after an initial visual estimate; calibration had been checked prior to shift.
- Appellant drove onto a private driveway and parked; trooper activated lights as the vehicle turned in.
- Appellant exited with hands in his pockets; trooper frisked him for weapons and noted glassy, bloodshot eyes, flushed face, and a strong odor of alcohol.
- Appellant resisted, attempted to walk away, and was wrestled to the ground; a second trooper arrived and used a five-second Taser stun due to ongoing resistance.
- Appellant was read Miranda rights at the scene; he later made statements at the hospital within about two hours and denied coercion; trial court denied suppression; the State later dismissed other charges and the defendant pled no contest to amended counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion. | Asp claims no lawful cause; argues absence of speed violation justification. | Asp argues speeding not proven; thus stop was unlawful. | Stop supported by reasonable suspicion; credible speeding evidence |
| Whether the post-arrest statements were voluntary and properly Miranda-warned given prior taser exposure. | State argues warnings were given; voluntary waiver under totality of circumstances. | Asp contends Warnings may have gone stale or coercive factors present. | Miranda warnings not stale; statements voluntary under totality of circumstances |
Key Cases Cited
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (upholds stop based on probable cause for traffic violation regardless of ulterior motives)
- City of Dayton v. Erickson, 76 Ohio St.3d 3 (1996) (stop valid with articulable suspicion regardless of underlying motivation)
- State v. Mays, 119 Ohio St.3d 406 (2008) (reasonable, articulable suspicion governs traffic stops; severity not required)
- State v. Rice, 2006-Ohio-3703 (2006) (appellate guidance on traffic stops and suspicion)
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (credibility and weight in suppression determinations; deference to trial court)
- State v. Roberts, 32 Ohio St.3d 225 (1987) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for admissibility of statements)
- Berghuis v. Thompkins, 130 S. Ct. 2250 (2010) (no need for rewarnings; course of conduct indicated waiver)