State v. Fleming
2022 Ohio 1876
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- On April 15, 2020, Springfield officers stopped a Chevy Equinox registered to Appellant Fleming’s girlfriend after officers suspected Fleming was driving; a LEADS check showed Fleming’s license was suspended and an outstanding warrant existed.
- During arrest on the warrant and a search incident to arrest, officers felt a hard crystalline item; a small baggie fell from Fleming’s pant leg and tested positive for 1.08 g methamphetamine and 0.33 g cocaine.
- Detective Allender obtained Facebook Messenger records for an account used as "Flipp Royal," which he linked to Fleming and which contained March 2020 messages arranging multiple small drug sales.
- Fleming was indicted for aggravated trafficking (meth), aggravated possession (meth), trafficking (cocaine), and possession (cocaine); he moved to suppress the stop/search, which the trial court denied.
- A jury convicted Fleming on all counts; the court merged counts and imposed consecutive sentences totaling 30 months. Fleming appealed, challenging suppression, sufficiency/weight of the trafficking convictions, and admission of the Facebook messages.
- The court affirmed the denial of the suppression motion but held the State’s evidence insufficient to prove Fleming was trafficking on April 15 (the Facebook messages were remote and did not connect the April 15 drugs to a sale); trafficking convictions reversed and case remanded for resentencing on possession counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Fleming) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Was the traffic stop supported by reasonable suspicion? | Officers had articulable suspicion: vehicle registered to girlfriend, driver matched Fleming’s silhouette/appearance, LEADS showed no valid license; collective officer ID supported stop. | Stop was invalid because tinted windows/vehicle height made reliable identification impossible. | Stop upheld: court credited officers’ IDs, applied collective-knowledge doctrine, and found reasonable suspicion. |
| 2. Was the search and seizure of drugs lawful? | Arrest on an outstanding warrant justified arrest and a search incident to arrest that yielded contraband. | Search was fruit of an unlawful stop (if stop invalid). | Search lawful because stop and identification were reasonable; search incident to arrest valid. |
| 3. Were the Facebook Messenger messages admissible / probative of trafficking? | Messages showed prior trafficking, including small-quantity sales, and linked account to Fleming. | Messages were remote in time and could reflect other users of the account; they do not prove trafficking on April 15. | Admission issue left unresolved by sufficiency ruling (treated as moot on appeal), but court found evidence insufficient to link March messages to the April 15 possession. |
| 4. Was evidence sufficient to sustain trafficking convictions for April 15? | Prior Facebook evidence and Fleming’s status as a seller supported inference that the April 15 drugs were intended for sale/transport for sale. | Amount on person was small, consistent with personal use; no indicia of trafficking (no cash, scales, packaging) tied the April 15 drugs to sales. | Convictions for trafficking reversed: evidence insufficient to prove trafficking on April 15; possession convictions left intact and remand ordered for resentencing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (Terry stop/reasonableness standard)
- Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (Fourth Amendment touchstone is reasonableness)
- Kansas v. Glover, 140 S. Ct. 1183 (reasonable suspicion standard explained)
- State v. Leak, 145 Ohio St.3d 165 (totality-of-the-circumstances review for stops)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (circumstantial and direct evidence have equal probative value)
- State v. Retherford, 93 Ohio App.3d 586 (standard of appellate review of suppression findings)