State v. Bowens, 2014 Ohio 4263

Lorain County deputies responded to a fight call at The Brass Pole; they observed four men in the parking lot and attempted to talk to them.
Bowens walked away from the deputies; as they approached, he threw up his right arm and a white object flew from his hand.
Deputies detained Bowens, conducted a pat-down, and recovered a baggie that appeared to contain crack cocaine.
Bowens was charged with trafficking with a forfeiture specification, tampering with evidence, possessing or using drug paraphernalia, and two counts of possession of drugs.
Bowens moved to suppress all evidence as the product of an illegal seizure; the trial court denied the motion; Bowens pleaded no contest and was convicted.
On appeal, Bowens argues the stop lacked reasonable suspicion; the court affirms the suppression denial and conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the deputies had reasonable suspicion to detain Bowens	Bowens argues the stop was unlawful	Bowens argues the seizure lacked reasonable suspicion	Yes, reasonable suspicion existed

California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991) (briefs on searches outside formal process; vehicle/container excision exception to warrant requirement)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (establishes reasonable suspicion for brief seizures)
Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980) (defining seizure for purposes of Fourth Amendment)
Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (1991) (seizure occurs when freedom of movement is restrained)
State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003-Ohio-5372) (mixed question of law and fact in suppression review)
State v. Mays, 119 Ohio St.3d 406 (2008-Ohio-4539) (totality of circumstances standard for reasonable suspicion)
State v. Bobo, 37 Ohio St.3d 177 (1988) (reasonable, articulable suspicion doctrine in Ohio)