State v. Brooks
2013 Ohio 58
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Appellant Felix P. Brooks appeals from a judgment in Lake County, Ohio, for trafficking in marijuana and operating a vehicle under the influence (OVI).
- Brooks moved to suppress evidence, challenging the stop, the sobriety tests, and probable cause for arrest; suppression hearing held with Patrolman Coolick testifying and NHTSA test standards admitted.
- The stop was based on weaving and a marked-lanes violation; Brooks was in a motel parking lot, where an odor of alcohol and other indicia were observed.
- Three field sobriety tests were administered (HGN, one-leg stand, walk-and-turn); the HGN was suppressed for non-compliance with NHTSA, but one-leg stand and walk-and-turn were found to be administered in substantial compliance.
- Brooks admitted consuming two beers and appeared somewhat incoherent; after arrest, marijuana was found in the trunk during an inventory search of the tow.
- Brooks withdrew his not guilty plea, pled no contest to trafficking and OVI, and was sentenced to community control with conditions including jail time, treatment, AA meetings, and random screenings; the vehicle inventory issue arose on appeal as to ineffective assistance of counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause to arrest for OVI despite suppression of HGN and minor test irregularities | Brooks argues there was no probable cause based on incomplete/invalid sobriety tests | Brooks contends noncompliant or flawed tests negate probable cause | Probable cause supported by totality of circumstances; one-leg stand and walk-and-turn upheld as substantial compliance |
| Ineffective assistance for not challenging the inventory/search of Brooks's vehicle | Goes unchallenged in record; inventory/search would be suppressible | Counsel was ineffective for not pursuing inventory/search suppression | Record silent; no reversible error; ineffective-assistance claim not established on direct appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89 (U.S. 1964) (probable cause framework for warrantless arrests)
- State v. Wojewodka, 2010-Ohio-973 (11th Dist. 2010) (totality-of-the-circumstances standard for probable cause; admissibility of field tests)
- State v. McNulty, 11th Dist. No. 2008-L-097, 2009-Ohio-1830 (11th Dist. 2009) (probable cause can be found even if tests are excluded)
- State v. Brown, 166 Ohio App.3d 638 (11th Dist. 2006) (substantial compliance standard for field sobriety tests)
- State v. Djisheff, 11th Dist. No. 2005-T-0001, 2006-Ohio-6201 (11th Dist. 2006) (odor and admission as probative to probable cause)
- State v. King, 11th Dist. No. 2009-P-0040, 2010-Ohio-3254 (11th Dist. 2010) (instructional sufficiency for substantial compliance with NHTSA)
- State v. Wotring, 11th Dist. No. 2010-L-009, 2010-Ohio-5797 (11th Dist. 2010) (inventory searches of impounded vehicles lawful if routine and in good faith)
- State v. Clay, 2009-Ohio-2725 (8th Dist. 2009) (inventory/search validity following lawful arrest)