State v. Green
2013 Ohio 3728
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Gregory Green was indicted for marijuana cultivation, possession, and possessing criminal tools; bench trial followed denial of suppression motion.
- Police went to 13917 Woodworth Ave. on an active arrest warrant after an anonymous tip and neighbor confirmation; they surrounded the house and announced.
- Officers smelled a "strong"/"robust" odor of marijuana from the rear/second-floor area and observed exterior ventilation and a running upstairs air conditioner with covered windows—circumstances consistent with a grow house.
- Detectives left to obtain a search warrant (approx. two hours); appellant later exited and surrendered; officers did not enter until the warrant arrived according to police testimony.
- Search warrant execution recovered 122 marijuana plants, vacuum‑sealed bags of marijuana, smaller bags, and a firearm; trial court found officers credible and denied suppression.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers conducted an unlawful warrantless search/protective sweep before obtaining a warrant | Police: no entry occurred before warrant; any sweep was after warrant | Green: officers did a protective sweep and then obtained a warrant based on observations made after warrantless entry | Court: credited officers; no unlawful pre-warrant entry shown; motion to suppress denied |
| Whether affidavit provided probable cause for a search warrant | Police: strong odor of marijuana + venting/AC/covered windows + tip/appearance = fair probability of a grow operation | Green: odor claim unreliable; AC not connected to basement; observations insufficient | Court: magistrate had substantial basis; odor + corroborating observations support probable cause |
| Whether affidavit contained intentionally false or recklessly misleading statements (Franks challenge) | N/A for state; affidavit statements were truthful based on officer experience | Green: officers misrepresented timing/observations to justify warrant | Court: defendant failed to show intentional or reckless falsehoods; no Franks relief granted |
| Whether seized evidence is excluded or saved by good‑faith exception | State: even if minor defects, Leon good‑faith applies | Green: sought exclusion if warrant invalid or obtained by misstatements | Court: evidence admissible; warrant valid and Leon would apply if needed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (standard of appellate review for suppression rulings)
- State v. Craig, 110 Ohio St.3d 306 (2006) (deference to magistrate on probable cause; Illinois v. Gates standard)
- State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 (2000) (officer’s detection of marijuana odor can establish probable cause)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good‑faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- State v. George, 45 Ohio St.3d 325 (1989) (courts should resolve doubtful/marginal probable‑cause cases in favor of upholding warrants)