State v. Fleming
2013 Ohio 503
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Fleming was indicted Feb 21, 2012 on multiple drug trafficking/possession charges and weapon under disability; the State appealed a suppression ruling from Aug 30, 2012.
- Fleming filed a suppression motion in June 2012 and a supplemental motion in July 2012, attaching a 2003 conviction stating post-release control (PRC) could be mandatory up to five years.
- At a suppression hearing, Parole Officer Barrett testified Fleming was placed on supervision Aug 25, 2010, with a Ninth Condition providing warrantless searches by parole personnel.
- Barrett conducted a warrantless search of Fleming’s residence at 1924 Ontario Ave on Feb 13, 2012, discovering a handgun and cocaine, and then secured a search warrant with Springfield police assistance.
- Detective Collins later prepared an affidavit for a search warrant based on Barrett’s information; the questioned materials were seized during the Ontario residence search and linked to the trafficking case.
- The trial court granted Fleming’s suppression motion, ruling the 2003 PRC sentence was void and Barrett lacked authority to search; it held the subsequent warrant was tainted and suppressible.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fleming was properly placed on post-release control | State argues proper placement occurred. | Fleming contends PRC portion was void for lack of proper sentencing entry. | PRC portion void; not properly placed on PRC. |
| Whether Barrett’s warrantless residence search was lawful | Barrett acted under PRC authority to search. | Search invalid because PRC was void. | Unlawful warrantless search; Barrett lacked authority. |
| Whether evidence tainted by the unlawful search must be suppressed | Evidence derived from Barrett’s search supports the warrant. | Good faith may save evidence. | Evidentiary suppression warranted; taint not purged by good faith. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Blackshear, 2011-Ohio-2059 (2d Dist. Montgomery No. 24302, 2011-Ohio-2059) (post-release control notification requirements)
- State v. Bloomer, 122 Ohio St.3d 200 (2010-Ohio-2462) (proper sentencing entry imposing post-release control required)
- State v. Billiter, 2012-Ohio-5144 (Supreme Court) (void postrelease-control sentence may affect consequences)