State v. Marcum, 993 N.E.2d 1289

State appeals from the Licking County Municipal Court's November 21, 2012 judgment granting Marcum's Motion to Suppress.
Marcum was charged on September 9, 2012 with DUI (R.C. 4511.19(A)(2)/(A)(1)(a)) and a marked lanes violation (R.C. 4511.33).
Marcum filed a Motion to Dismiss/Suppress on September 13, 2012; a suppression hearing occurred October 25, 2012.
Trooper Thaxton testified he observed Marcum cross the white fog line and the solid yellow line, with video not capturing the white line due to cresting.
The video was admitted; the trial court granted suppression, finding no violation of R.C. 4511.33 and no basis to stop.
On appeal, State argues the stop was supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion; Marcum contends there was no basis for the stop.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there was reasonable suspicion to stop.	State contends the driver crossed lane markings, supporting a stop.	Marcum argues no violation or reasonable suspicion existed.	No; stop unsupported; suppression affirmed.

Maumee v. Weisner, 87 Ohio St.3d 295 (1999) (reasonable suspicion standards for investigative stops)
State v. Gedeon, 81 Ohio App.3d 617 (1992) (totality of circumstances for reasonable suspicion)
State v. Messick, 2007-Ohio-1824 (2007) (markers of lane deviation supporting suspicion when combined with other factors)
State v. Grigoryan, 2010-Ohio-2883 (2010) (inconsequential movement within a lane does not create suspicion)
State v. Franklin, 2012-Ohio-3089 (2012) (small encroachments on lane markings do not alone establish suspicion)
State v. Landon, 2009-Ohio-6818 (2009) (drifting within lane insufficient for stop absent further signals)