2019 Ohio 2419
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Detective Dustin Robison obtained a March 28, 2017 search warrant for 18692 Laurel Run Road (Keefer’s residence) based on an affidavit relying largely on a confidential informant’s tips and some past police activity.
- Affidavit averments included: (1) a 2016 anonymous tip and an August 2016 execution of an arrest warrant at the address where $2,080 and firearms were seized and Gilmore (Keefer’s girlfriend) said the money was drug proceeds; (2) a confidential informant’s reports in March 2017 that Keefer (and others) were traveling to Columbus to buy drugs and that on March 28, 2017 drugs, money, firearms were at the residence; (3) confirmation by police that Keefer had outstanding warrants, including in Franklin County.
- The municipal judge issued the search warrant; execution recovered heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine, firearms, phones, and cash.
- Keefer moved to suppress the evidence arguing the affidavit lacked probable cause; the trial court granted the motion and additionally held the good-faith exception did not apply because the affidavit lacked indicia of the informant’s reliability and included stale information.
- The State appealed, challenging the probable-cause ruling and the trial court’s rejection of the Leon good-faith exception.
- The Fourth District affirmed lack of probable cause but reversed the suppression by holding officers acted in objective good faith: the affidavit was not so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to make reliance on the warrant entirely unreasonable, especially given prior corroborating events and approval by prosecutor and neutral magistrate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Keefer) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether affidavit supported probable cause for a search warrant | Informant gave specific, corroboratable details (names, address, car) and was sufficiently reliable to establish probable cause | Tip was uncorroborated hearsay; affidavit failed to establish informant reliability and contained stale information | Court: Affidavit did not establish probable cause (trial court and appellate court agreed) |
| Whether the good-faith exception (Leon) bars suppression | Even if probable cause lacking, officers reasonably relied on a warrant signed by a neutral magistrate; affidavit not so deficient that belief in its validity was entirely unreasonable | A reasonably well‑trained deputy would know the affidavit did not establish probable cause; good-faith exception should not apply | Court: Good-faith exception applies; suppression reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (totality-of-circumstances test for probable cause)
- State v. George, 45 Ohio St.3d 325 (Ohio standard on when Leon exception does not apply)
- United States v. Ventresca, 380 U.S. 102 (preference for warrants; magistrate’s practical determination)
- Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325 (anonymous tip can provide reasonable suspicion when corroborated)