2023 Ohio 682
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- Trooper stopped a vehicle for expired tags; upon approach he detected a strong odor of raw marijuana.
- Trooper removed driver and passenger (Quazaa Farrow), read Miranda warnings, handcuffed and detained them in the patrol car; a deputy assisted.
- Trooper and deputy searched the passenger compartment initially and found no contraband; deputy left the scene.
- Trooper reviewed in-cruiser audio/video of the detainees and re-questioned the driver, then called for another backup and resumed a more extensive search, including the engine compartment.
- A bag of marijuana was found under the front passenger seat; methamphetamine (~90 g) and heroin (~17 g) were found hidden near the passenger-side headlight.
- Trial court suppressed, finding the post‑search detention and video review unlawfully prolonged the stop; the appellate court reversed, holding the search was continuous and justified by the strong odor of raw marijuana.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Farrow's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trooper’s actions constituted one continuous search or two separate searches requiring a new reasonable suspicion before continuation | The odor of raw marijuana gave probable cause to search the entire vehicle; review of recordings and continued detention were part of a continuous investigation to locate hidden contraband | The initial search of the passenger compartment dispelled suspicion; detaining and re-searching after reviewing video required a new reasonable articulable suspicion and thus was an unlawful extension | One continuous search: strong odor of raw marijuana justified searching entire vehicle and continued detention to focus the search without a new suspicion |
| Whether smell of raw marijuana permits searches beyond passenger compartment (trunk/engine) | Strong/raw marijuana odor supports probable cause to search areas that could conceal large quantities (trunk, containers, engine) | Smell alone is insufficient to justify searching beyond passenger compartment absent additional facts | Odor of raw marijuana can justify a warrantless search of the whole vehicle under the automobile exception |
| Whether failure to find contraband in initial compartment search dispels probable cause | Not dispelled; inability to locate does not negate probable cause derived from odor; officers may continue reasonable searches to find hidden contraband | Finding nothing in the passenger compartment terminates the basis to detain and search further without new reasonable suspicion | Not dispelled; officers may continue searching the vehicle so long as the original probable cause remains reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (traffic stop reasonable if officer has probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a violation)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015) (traffic-stop mission limits permissible detention; extensions require independent reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982) (when probable cause exists to search a vehicle, officers may search every part that may contain the object of the search)
- State v. Farris, 109 Ohio St.3d 519 (2006) (odor of burnt marijuana generally limits search to passenger compartment)
- State v. Murrell, 94 Ohio St.3d 489 (2002) (search incident to lawful custodial arrest may extend to passenger compartment)
- State v. Maddox, 168 N.E.3d 613 (10th Dist. 2021) (odor of raw marijuana supports probable cause to search entire vehicle; relinquishing small amount does not dispel probable cause)
- State v. Jones, 185 N.E.3d 131 (4th Dist. 2022) (continued detention after traffic stop requires reasonable articulable suspicion)
- State v. Robinette, 80 Ohio St.3d 234 (1997) (continued detention unrelated to stop's mission requires articulable suspicion)