2011 Ohio 2019
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Police responded to a shots-fired call naming two suspects; witnesses identified a black male in a newer black vehicle fleeing toward Cleveland Avenue.
- Officer Kaufman patrolled the area and observed a two-door black 2001 Oldsmobile Alero with a black male driver several blocks away, shortly after leaving the scene.
- Officer Kaufman blocked the car, conducted a patdown, and felt a bulge he identified as crack cocaine, later seizing it and recovering cash.
- Appellant was charged with two counts of possession of drugs and two counts of trafficking in drugs, each with forfeiture specifications, plus a Schedule IV possession charge.
- Appellant moved to suppress the stop and ensuing search; the trial court denied the motion and he pled no contest, receiving an 18-month sentence.
- The appellate court reversed the suppression ruling, finding the stop not justified by the totality of circumstances and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the investigative stop justified by totality of circumstances? | Hill contends the stop violated Fourth Amendment and Ohio law. | Hill argues there were no specific, articulable facts to support the stop. | Stop not justified under totality of circumstances; reversal remanding for proceedings. |
| Did the court properly apply suppression standards to the facts? | State asserts proper application of law to findings of fact. | Hill argues legal standard was misapplied in evaluating the stop. | Court independently concluded the facts did not meet the legal standard for a stop. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 19 (1982) (standard for reviewing factual findings on suppression)
- State v. Klein, 73 Ohio App.3d 486 (1991) (deference limitations on appellate review of suppression rulings)
- State v. Williams, 86 Ohio App.3d 37 (1993) (error of law in applying suppression standards)
- State v. Grayson, 72 Ohio App.3d 283 (1991) (totality of circumstances standard for stops)
- State v. Freeman, 64 Ohio St.2d 291 (1980) (objective standard for stop reasonableness)
- State v. Andrews, 57 Ohio St.3d 86 (1991) (eyes of reasonable officer in evaluating stop circumstances)
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) (reasonable expectation of privacy; framework for searches)