State v. Cooks
2017 Ohio 218
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Defendant Frederick Cooks pleaded no-contest to evidence tampering, possession of cocaine, and possession of heroin after police discovered drugs while executing an arrest warrant at 35 East Cecil Street.
- A warrant for Cooks’ arrest issued from a failure-to-comply felony arising from an incident that began at 35 East Cecil Street.
- Officer Elliott investigated, viewed Facebook photos tying Cooks to the Cecil Street residence, observed surveillance placing Cooks there previously, and learned from a hotel receptionist and a neighbor that Cooks had been at or lived at the address.
- Officers approached, knocked, announced their presence, observed blinds move, and heard a “scurrying” sound inside; no one answered.
- Officers forced entry, found Cooks hiding in the attic and drugs in plain view; after securing statements and getting a search warrant, more drugs were recovered.
- Trial court denied suppression; the appellate court reviewed de novo the legal issue and affirmed, holding the entry to execute the arrest warrant was lawful under Payton’s “reason to believe” standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Cooks) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether police lawfully entered the home to execute an arrest warrant without a search warrant | Officers had reason to believe Cooks lived at the house and was present when they announced; neighbor ID, surveillance, FB photos, and sounds supported entry | Officers lacked reason to believe Cooks lived there or was present: address belonged to another, no vehicle, no witnesses saw him enter that day, no voices heard | Entry lawful. Totality of circumstances gave officers a reasonable belief Cooks resided there and was inside when they knocked, permitting warrant execution under Payton |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (U.S. 1980) (arrest warrant carries limited authority to enter a suspect’s dwelling when officers have reason to believe the suspect lives there and is present)
- United States v. Pruitt, 458 F.3d 477 (6th Cir. 2006) (reasonable-belief standard is less than probable cause; evaluate common-sense factors and totality of circumstances)
- Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (U.S. 1981) (distinguishes need for a search warrant to enter third-party homes to search for a nonresident subject of an arrest warrant)
- United States v. McKinney, 379 F.2d 259 (6th Cir. 1967) (early Sixth Circuit discussion of entry to effectuate arrest in a residence)
- State v. Retherford, 93 Ohio App.3d 586 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994) (trial court as factfinder on suppression; appellate court accepts factual findings supported by credible evidence)