State v. Curry, 2013 Ohio 5454

Police obtained a warrant to search a Dayton duplex (535–537 Bolander Ave.) after a confidential informant and detectives conducted two controlled buys and surveillance indicating drug activity.
Execution of the warrant uncovered multiple bags of crack cocaine hidden on the 537 side (totaling 206.1 g: 47.75 g in a couch cushion, 27.98 g on a kitchen cabinet, 130.37 g in a floor vent) and a 0.5 g bag on a dresser; scales and paraphernalia were also found.
Officers found a handgun under a dresser in the upstairs bedroom on the 535 side and another handgun, magazine, and ammo in a black bag hidden in a floor vent on the 537 side.
Curry was arrested, read Miranda warnings, and admitted owning the duplex and possessing some crack (the amounts from the couch cushion and cabinet) and sometimes converting powdered cocaine into crack to sell; he denied knowledge of the floor-vent crack and the guns.
Charged with possession of over 100 grams of crack (major-drug-offender specification) and two counts of having weapons while under disability; he moved to suppress the evidence and his statements, lost the motion, and was convicted after a bench trial and sentenced to an aggregate 11 years.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of search warrant	Affidavit established probable cause via reliable CI, two controlled buys, and detective surveillance	Affidavit relied mainly on informant credibility; lacked independent corroboration (no recording/ direct observation of sale)	Warrant valid; affidavit provided sufficient corroboration and practical-probability standard met (Gates test)
Admissibility of statements	Statements admissible; not fruit of invalid search	Statements should be suppressed if warrant invalid (fruit of poisonous tree)	Statements admissible because warrant was valid; not fruit of poisonous tree
Sufficiency of evidence — possession of >100 g crack	Evidence showed Curry’s dominion/control over duplex, admissions re: drug sales, similarity/packaging of drugs supports knowledge of 130.37 g in vent	Curry denied knowledge of that cache; challenged proof he knowingly possessed that amount	Sufficient evidence that Curry constructively possessed and was aware of the 130.37 g; conviction stands
Sufficiency of evidence — having weapon while under disability	Evidence of dominion/control over premises and items supports constructive possession/knowledge of handgun in vent	Curry testified he didn’t know about the guns; defense witness claimed he placed one gun under dresser	Sufficient evidence to infer Curry knew of the handgun in the vent; conviction for gun on 537 side affirmed (535-side gun not attributed to Curry)

Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (standard for magistrate’s probable-cause decision; practical, common-sense probability test)
State v. George, 45 Ohio St.3d 325 (applying Gates standard in Ohio)
State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (mixed question review for suppression; accept trial court factual findings if supported)
State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (weight-of-the-evidence framework)
United States v. Kincaide, 145 F.3d 771 (constructive possession inference from dominion over premises applies to firearms)
State v. Dillard, 173 Ohio App.3d 373 (definition and proof of constructive possession in Ohio)
State v. Pilgrim, 184 Ohio App.3d 675 (constructive possession may be inferred from surrounding facts and defendant’s actions)