State v. Jackson, 2020 Ohio 2677

On Jan. 22, 2018 a fight and multiple gunshots occurred at an apartment in Madison County; two people (Benson and Coffey) died, two others (Jackson and Edmond) were wounded.
Jackson left the scene, went to a motel, then to Springfield Regional Medical Center (SRMC) over 30 minutes away, where staff cut off bloody clothing and notified police.
Springfield officers collected Jackson's bloody clothing from SRMC without a warrant; the clothing was later tested for DNA. London/Madison law enforcement collected a surveillance video from the apartment door showing the outside portion of the incident.
Jackson was indicted on multiple counts including murder, felonious assault, aggravated burglary, and having weapons while under disability; most counts included firearm specifications.
Jackson moved to suppress (clothing and cell-site/location evidence); the trial court denied suppression. At trial the jury convicted Jackson of murder, felonious assault, aggravated burglary, and a firearm specification; the court convicted him of weapons under disability and sentenced him to an aggregate 37 years to life.
Jackson appealed, raising three assignments of error: (1) denial of mistrial during voir dire, (2) admission of surveillance video (authentication/chain of custody), and (3) denial of suppression of clothing seized at SRMC.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Jackson)	Held
Warrantless seizure of bloody clothing at SRMC	Officers were lawfully in the room investigating a gunshot victim; clothing in plain view and associated with criminal activity justified seizure under plain view.	Jackson retained a possessory Fourth Amendment interest in his clothing; warrantless seizure violated his rights.	Court: Jackson may have retained possessory interest but seizure lawful under plain view; no Fourth Amendment violation.
Denial of motion for mistrial based on prosecutor voir dire questions	Questions about credibility and incentives to lie were proper voir dire matters; court gave curative instructions.	Prosecutor’s wording suggested Jackson would be judged differently as an accused and implicated his right to remain silent; required mistrial.	Court: No abuse of discretion; questions were general, objections were sustained, and jury instructions cured any potential prejudice.
Admissibility of surveillance video (State's Exhibit 2) — authentication and chain of custody	Edmond (camera owner) and others testified the video fairly and accurately depicted the events; BCI/analyst handling showed chain of custody; defense relied on same footage at trial.	State failed to authenticate the video under Evid.R. 901 and did not establish chain of custody.	Court: Authentication threshold met (reasonable likelihood); chain of custody sufficiently established; any minor gaps went to weight, not admissibility.

State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (standard of review for suppression—mixed question of law and fact)
United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109 (1984) (seizure challenge requires showing interference with possessory interest)
United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696 (1983) (warrantless seizures presumptively unreasonable absent exception)
State v. Buzzard, 112 Ohio St.3d 451 (2007) (plain view doctrine authorizes warrantless seizure when officer lawfully present and incriminating nature is immediately apparent)
United States v. Davis, 690 F.3d 226 (4th Cir. 2012) (hospital patients retain possessory interest in clothing)
United States v. Neely, 345 F.3d 366 (5th Cir. 2003) (discussing possessory interests in patient property)
State v. Franklin, 62 Ohio St.3d 118 (1991) (mistrial required only when fair trial no longer possible)
State v. Treesh, 90 Ohio St.3d 460 (2001) (same standard for mistrial relief)
State v. Glover, 35 Ohio St.3d 18 (1988) (trial court has broad discretion on mistrial; appellate deference)
State v. Ahmed, 103 Ohio St.3d 27 (2004) (jurors presumed to follow trial court instructions)