2012 Ohio 4237
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Appellant Harris challenged a traffic-stop suppression ruling following a ride-along in an Impala with three other passengers.
- Trooper Seabolt observed the Impala tailing a tractor-trailer too closely on US-23, prompting a stop for a traffic violation under R.C. 4511.34.
- During the stop, marijuana odor and flakes were found; a quarter ounce of crack cocaine was admitted to be in the car.
- Appellant and a co-defendant were charged with trafficking and possession of crack cocaine.
- A suppression motion alleged lack of reasonable suspicion/probable cause to stop; the trial court denied the motion.
- Appellant pled no contest to the charges and timely appeals the suppression ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion or probable cause | Harris: no evidence of any traffic violation beyond following too closely | State: minor violation justified stop; evidence supports stop | Stop justified; suppression denied |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ward, 2011-Ohio-1261 (4th Dist., 2011) (police may stop for following too closely; probable cause sufficiency)
- State v. McNamara, 124 Ohio App.3d 706 (2000-Ohio-) (mixed law/fact review; credibility of trial court findings preserved)
- State v. Emerick, 4th Dist. No. 06CA45, 2007-Ohio-4398 (2007-Ohio-4398) (totality of circumstances; investigative stop permissible)
- State v. Landrum, 137 Ohio App.3d 718 (2000) (appellate de novo review of law applied to facts)
- State v. Guseman, 2009-Ohio-952 (4th Dist. No. 08CA15) (de minimis traffic violations justify stops under certain circumstances)
- State v. Bowie, 2002-Ohio-3553 (4th Dist. No. 01CA34) (precedent on following too closely; stops permissible)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (pretextual stops; reasonable suspicion standard)
- California v. Acevedo, 500 U.S. 565 (1991) (probable cause exceptions to searches)
- State v. Perry, 12th Dist. No. CA2004-11-016 (2005-Ohio-6041) (speaks to objective facts for traffic stops)
- Dayton v. Erickson, 76 Ohio St.3d 3 () (rule about reasonable and prudent following distance)