2022 Ohio 1571
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- ShotSpotter alerted police to gunfire in a residential dead-end street in Westwood, Cincinnati, on Oct. 25, 2020; officers were dispatched to a radius covering 2528–2568 Hansford Place.
- A plain-clothes officer arrived within five minutes and reported a lone male at the scene; Officer Wallace arrived about three minutes later.
- Bodycam footage showed Henson placing three young children in the rear seat of his vehicle; officers nonetheless approached and asked if he had heard gunfire; Henson said no.
- Officer Wallace told Henson he would pat him down for weapons; Henson became agitated and turned away; the officer then conducted a pat-down, found a loaded handgun in Henson’s waistband, and arrested him; drugs were also recovered.
- Henson moved to suppress evidence from the warrantless seizure and frisk; the trial court granted suppression, holding the stop and frisk unconstitutional; the state appealed and the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether initial police contact was a consensual encounter | Contact following ShotSpotter alert was investigative, but initial approach and questions were permissible | Initial approach was consensual; no seizure until pat-down decision | Consensual encounter: yes (no seizure at initial question) |
| Whether officers had reasonable, articulable suspicion to detain and frisk Henson for weapons (Terry frisk) | ShotSpotter report of nearby shots, high-crime neighborhood, report of a lone male at scene, dark/rainy conditions, and Henson’s agitation justified frisk | No reasonable suspicion: officer did not personally hear shots, delay in arrival, unclear radius, children present, no bulge or weapons indicators, officers never asked about weapons | No reasonable suspicion to justify pat-down; frisk unconstitutional; suppression affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (established stop-and-frisk standard)
- Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (1991) (police questioning does not automatically produce a seizure; consensual encounter standard)
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (1983) (distinguishing consensual encounter, detention, arrest)
- Michigan v. Chesternut, 486 U.S. 567 (1988) (seizure is a factual determination from totality of circumstances)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (contextual factors and presence in high-crime area relevant to reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (reasonable-suspicion analysis uses totality of circumstances)
- State v. Hairston, 156 Ohio St.3d 363 (2019) (officer hearing nearby gunfire and other contextual factors supported stop)
- State v. Hawkins, 158 Ohio St.3d 94 (2019) (reasonable-suspicion is a less than probable cause, totality-based standard)
- State v. Andrews, 57 Ohio St.3d 86 (1991) (rationale for protective frisk to ensure officer safety)
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (standard of appellate review for suppression rulings)