State v. Latona
2011 Ohio 1253
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Latona was stopped on I-71 for a suspected lane-usage violation; stop occurred in Richland County, Ohio.
- Latona locked both doors, removed keys and appeared unusually nervous during the stop.
- The officer, while waiting for dispatch, walked a police dog around Latona’s vehicle after discovering communication delays.
- The dog passive-indicated the odor of illegal narcotics, prompting a vehicle search.
- A loaded black-powder muzzle-loading pistol with percussion caps was located behind the driver’s seat during the search.
- Latona was charged with Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle; suppression motion denied; he pleaded no contest and was sentenced.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the suppression ruling was correct | State argues stop was valid and dog sniff lawfully expanded the stop. | Latona argues the extended detention and search violated the Fourth Amendment. | Denied; suppression denied, search upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (1983) (scope of detention must be limited to initial stop purpose)
- United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975) (permits expansion of stop with reasonable suspicion of criminal activity)
- United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696 (1982) (dog sniffs are not searches requiring reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Robinette, 80 Ohio St.3d 234, 685 N.E.2d 762 (1997) (continued detention requires articulable suspicion; illegal seizure if not related to stop purpose)