State v. Fowler
2018 Ohio 241
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Columbus Task Force monitored a suspected drug distributor and tracked a rented SUV; Ohio State Trooper Nick Lewis stopped the vehicle for traffic violations.
- Trooper Lewis smelled strong marijuana from the vehicle and each occupant; he removed and patted down occupants sequentially.
- During a frisk of Monica Fowler (front-seat passenger) the trooper placed his hand between her legs and felt a hard object; Fowler gave inconsistent explanations (tampon/pad).
- Based on Task Force intelligence and the feel of the object, the trooper handcuffed Fowler and transported occupants to the post; cruiser video showed another occupant instructing Fowler to push the object further inside.
- Fowler voluntarily removed a package from her vagina containing 17g crack and 65g powder cocaine.
- Fowler moved to suppress evidence arguing the search/arrest were unlawful; at the suppression hearing her counsel conceded the pat-down was proper and narrowed the challenge to removal of the item and probable cause for arrest. The trial court denied suppression; Fowler pleaded no contest and was sentenced to three years.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Fowler's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the pat-down frisk of Fowler was lawful under Terry | Pat-down was lawful as a weapons frisk during a lawful stop and the officer reasonably suspected danger given marijuana odor and investigative context | Trooper lacked reasonable suspicion she was armed and frisk exceeded scope (genital pat-down) | Court did not decide merits because Fowler abandoned this challenge at hearing; issue forfeited/invited error |
| Whether the plain-feel doctrine justified seizure and arrest after feeling the object | Object felt like rock/contraband given totality (Task Force intel, feel, admissions on video), so seizure and arrest were justified | Trooper lacked probable cause to remove object or arrest based solely on pat-down feel | Trial court found plain-feel seizure justified; denial of suppression affirmed |
| Whether subsequent removal of contraband from Fowler’s body was voluntary/ lawful | Removal was voluntary after confrontation with video and supported by probable cause from plain feel | Removal and post-feel arrest were unlawful as fruit of an improper search/seizure | Court addressed removal/arrest issue (since raised) and found no suppression error after waiver of other claims |
| Whether appellate review should consider pat-down scope despite waiver at suppression hearing | N/A | Requested appellate review of pat-down scope and genital frisk | Appellate court held Fowler waived/forfeited those claims by narrowing her suppression hearing arguments; invited-error doctrine bars relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Codeluppi v. State, 10 N.E.3d 691 (Ohio 2014) (standard for mixed questions of law and fact on suppression review)
- Burnside v. State, 797 N.E.2d 71 (Ohio 2003) (trial court as finder of fact on suppression; appellate de novo review of legal conclusions)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (officer may frisk for weapons based on reasonable suspicion)
- Emerson v. State, 981 N.E.2d 787 (Ohio 2012) (Fourth Amendment and exclusionary rule principles)
- Crayton v. State, 86 N.E.3d 77 (Ohio 2017) (plain-feel doctrine permits seizure when criminal character is immediately apparent)