State v. Henry
2012 Ohio 4748
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Centerville Police Officer Osterfeld placed a GPS tracking device with a supplemental battery pack on the undercarriage of a car Henry was driving (not owned by Henry) after the car had been towed for an outstanding warrant.
- The device was magnetically attached and tracked only the location and speed of the vehicle, not other car information, for several weeks.
- In December 2010 the car traveled to Columbus and back; Osterfeld learned of thefts at Columbus-area dealerships and pursued the vehicle.
- Henry, with another man, retrieved tires from the car at a Dayton store and was subsequently arrested.
- Henry was charged with Receiving Stolen Property and Possession of Criminal Tools and moved to suppress the GPS-derived evidence as the product of an unlawful search.
- The trial court denied the suppression motion; Henry pled no contest and was convicted; on appeal, the GPS placement without a warrant was central to the court’s analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether warrantless GPS placement was a Fourth Amendment search | Henry | Henry | GPS placement constituted a search requiring a warrant |
| Whether the State can invoke a good-faith exception | Henry | Henry | State forfeited the issue; good-faith exception not applicable in this jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (2011) (good-faith reliance on binding precedent applies even if precedent is later overruled; not extending to persuasive, non-binding authority in this context)