State v. Lewis, 2017 Ohio 1195

Officer Perdue observed Lewis driving with very dark window tint and an improper lane change into a drugstore parking lot and initiated a traffic stop.
When Perdue approached, the vehicle was empty; passenger Makayla Patton identified Lewis as the driver and said he was inside the store. Patton had an outstanding warrant and prior drug-related field interviews.
Lewis exited the store; Perdue called him over, requested ID (which Lewis lacked), and touched Lewis’s back to begin a pat-down for officer safety based on the passenger’s drug history.
Lewis fled on foot when touched, ran into the street, fell, was caught, handcuffed, and arrested for obstructing official business.
A search incident to arrest of Lewis’s person uncovered Percocet, Xanax, heroin, and cash; the vehicle was impounded and inventoried.
Lewis moved to suppress all evidence; the trial court denied the motion. He pled no contest to heroin possession and aggravated drug possession and appealed, arguing the initial pat-down was unlawful, thus making the arrest and ensuing searches invalid.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the officer justified in attempting a pat-down during the traffic stop?	Patrol officer: pat-down was reasonable for officer safety given passenger’s drug-related field interviews.	Lewis: passenger’s history did not make Lewis a danger; no independent conduct by Lewis justified a pat-down.	Court: close call but unnecessary to decide; even assuming pat-down was unlawful, subsequent events cured the issue.
Did Lewis’s flight and capture create lawful grounds for arrest?	State: flight from a lawful traffic stop constituted obstructing official business, giving probable cause to arrest.	Lewis: arrest was invalid because it stemmed from an unlawful pat-down.	Court: flight from a valid traffic stop justified arrest for obstruction; no officer bad faith.
Were the drugs discovered admissible as search incident to arrest?	State: search incident to Lewis’s arrest for obstructing official business produced the drugs lawfully.	Lewis: evidence should be suppressed as fruit of illegal pat-down/arrest.	Court: drugs were found after lawful arrest; admissible.
Was the inventory search of the impounded vehicle lawful?	State: vehicle was impounded due to unlicensed driver and arrest; inventory search followed department policy.	Lewis: vehicle search was warrantless and improper.	Court: inventory under city tow policy justified impound and inventory search; items in vehicle not suppressed.

State v. Lawson, 180 Ohio App.3d 516 (2d Dist. 2009) (officers may conduct limited protective search for weapons after a lawful stop if they reasonably believe suspect may be armed)
State v. Pembaur, 9 Ohio St.3d 136 (1984) (defendant may not obstruct an officer’s duty even if officer’s actions are arguably unlawful)