2021 Ohio 1645
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- Jonathan Green was stopped April 20, 2018; officers found heroin, ecstasy, and marijuana in the car.
- Green subpoenaed cruiser and body‑camera recordings; the prosecutor produced most videos but not the motor‑vehicle‑recorder (MVR) from Officer Schildmeyer’s cruiser.
- At a suppression hearing Schildmeyer testified he delayed activating his cruiser lights for 45–60 seconds, so the MVR (which records 30 seconds prior to activation) would not have captured the lane change; he also testified he could not access or delete the cruiser hard drive and that supervisors handle MVR preservation and copying.
- Green later moved to dismiss for failure to preserve exculpatory evidence (the missing MVR); he argued the video could have shown he used his turn signal.
- The trial court found no showing of bad faith by the state and denied dismissal; Green entered no‑contest pleas to the charges and was convicted.
- On appeal the First District affirmed, holding the missing MVR was not shown to be materially exculpatory and the record contained no evidence of bad faith destruction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of motion to dismiss for failure to preserve video violated due process | MVR was not materially exculpatory for drug charges; state produced other recordings and no bad faith was shown; burden shifted to state after defendant subpoenaed evidence | Missing MVR could have shown lawful lane change/turn signal and was exculpatory; state failed to preserve evidence in bad faith | Court held MVR was not shown to be materially exculpatory for the drug charges and defendant did not prove bad faith; denial of dismissal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Benson, 152 Ohio App.3d 693 (Ohio App. 2003) (destruction of potentially useful evidence violates due process only if state acted in bad faith)
- State v. Benton, 136 Ohio App.3d 801 (Ohio App. 2000) (when defendant requests preservation and evidence is destroyed, burden shifts to state to show inculpatory value)
- State v. Geeslin, 116 Ohio St.3d 252 (Ohio 2007) (distinguishes materially exculpatory evidence from merely potentially useful evidence; bad‑faith finding required for due‑process violation when evidence is only potentially useful)