State v. Marrero, 2011 Ohio 3745

Lorain County police surveilled Jose Rodriguez for months and obtained a warrant to search his residence.
Marrero, Rodriguez’s nephew, arrived at the residence as officers executed the warrant and his locked duffel bag was searched, revealing cocaine.
An officer stated the bag looked like it contained 'almost a key' but Marrero corrected it was about 14 grams; Miranda warnings had not been given.
Marrero was indicted on trafficking in cocaine, possession of cocaine, and drug paraphernalia; suppression motions were filed and warrants unsealed.
He later acted pro se with standby counsel, sought suppression of an oral statement, pleaded no contest, and was sentenced to three years.
On appeal, the court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a determination of his ability to pay court-appointed attorney fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the duffel-bag search was authorized	Marrero: warrant lacked 'all persons' scope; Ybarra applies.	Marrero: police lacked authority to search him under the warrant.	Overruled; bag search authorized by warrant and surrounding items.
Whether Marrero’s statement was admissible without Miranda	Marrero: statement coerced; interrogation occurred at scene.	Marrero: no interrogation; remark was a non-directed observation.	Overruled; no interrogation; statement admissible.
Whether the court erred in ordering attorney-fee repayment	Marrero: must be able to pay before fees are imposed.	Marrero contends lack of financial-capability findings.	Sustained; remanded for determination of ability to pay.

State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357 (Ohio 1992) (mixed questions of law and fact in suppression review; defer to trial findings)
State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 19 (Ohio 1982) (standards for reviewing suppression decisions)
State v. McNamara, 124 Ohio App.3d 706 (Ohio App. 1997) (independent de novo review of legal conclusions after factual findings)
State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (Ohio 2003) (standard for appellate review of suppression and related issues)
State v. Conley, 2009-Ohio-910 (9th Dist. 2009) (structure of appellate review in suppression rulings)
State v. Overholt, 2003-Ohio-3500 (Ohio 2003) (particularity and scope of search warrants)
State v. Armstead, 2007-Ohio-1898 (Ohio 2007) (arising from broad warrant descriptions and allows reasonable identification of seized items)
State v. Redding, 2010-Ohio-4286 (Ohio 2010) (application of warrant scope to items and persons on premises)
State v. Smiley, 2008-Ohio-1915 (Ohio 2008) (functional equivalent of interrogation analysis)
Malone, 2010-Ohio-5658 (Ohio 2010) (requirement to prove financial ability before imposing court-appointed attorney fees)