State v. Elam, 2014 Ohio 1666

Trooper Moran stopped Shaun Elam for speeding (67 mph in a 55 mph zone) on June 8, 2013, and detected signs suggesting alcohol use (odor, red/glassy eyes, flushed cheeks).
Elam initially denied drinking, then admitted to two beers and said he was coming from Easton/Wal‑Mart.
Trooper Moran administered three standardized field sobriety tests: HGN (6 clues), one‑leg stand (1/4 clues), walk‑and‑turn (1/8 clues); Elam also recited the alphabet correctly twice.
Moran concluded Elam was over the legal limit and arrested him for OVI; Elam was charged with speeding and DUI (R.C. 4511.21; 4511.19).
Elam moved to suppress, arguing lack of probable cause; the trial court denied the motion (finding the facts provided a thin but sufficient basis), Elam pled no contest and was convicted and sentenced.
On appeal, the Fifth District affirmed, holding the totality of Moran’s observations and Elam’s admissions supplied probable cause to arrest.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Trooper Moran had probable cause to arrest Elam for OVI	State: Moran’s observations (odor, eyes, flushed face), admission of drinking, and HGN results provided sufficient probable cause	Elam: The evidence was insufficient — tests were mixed and two sobriety tests were effectively passed, so arrest lacked probable cause	Court affirmed: under totality of circumstances (including HGN and admissions) probable cause existed

State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 19 (discussing appellate review of suppression findings)
Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (reasonable suspicion/probable cause reviewed de novo)
Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160 (probable cause deals with practical probabilities)
State v. Timson, 38 Ohio St.2d 122 (probable cause standard for arrest in Ohio)
State v. Williams, 86 Ohio App.3d 37 (error of law review when trial court misapplies test)