2023 Ohio 464
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- On Sept. 3, 2021, Ohio State Trooper David Pangburn stopped Daniel McDonald’s vehicle on I-71 for allegedly having excessively dark window tint; trooper testified he "could not see anyone in the car."
- Trooper lacked a tint-meter in his cruiser that day but had three-plus years of road-patrol experience, had issued numerous tint citations, and testified front side windows must allow 50% light transmission.
- Trooper asked windows rolled down; dashcam video and a still photo were admitted at the suppression hearing.
- Following a search of the vehicle after the stop, McDonald was indicted on three weapons-related counts arising from the search.
- The trial court granted McDonald’s motion to suppress, finding the trooper’s belief pretextual because no post-stop testing/comparison evidence was presented; the state timely appealed; a July 15 trial-court entry issued after the notice of appeal was held void.
- The court of appeals reversed, holding the stop was supported by reasonable, articulable suspicion based on the trooper’s observations and training, and the suppression ruling was error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (McDonald) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legality of traffic stop based on alleged illegal window tint | Trooper reasonably (and objectively) believed tint violated the law; experience and observations provided reasonable suspicion even if mistaken | Trooper lacked objective proof (no meter/tests/comparison); court could see into the vehicle from the photo; stop was pretextual | Reversed suppression: officer’s contemporaneous observations and training supplied reasonable, articulable suspicion; absence of a post-stop meter test did not invalidate the stop |
| Effect of trial court’s July 15, 2022 journal entry issued after appeal | N/A — entry issued after state’s notice of appeal | Trial court’s July 15 elaboration attempted to correct/clarify the July 7 entry | July 15 entry was void/null because it was issued after the appeal was perfected and affected matters on appeal; appellate court will not consider it |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes stop-and-frisk reasonable-suspicion standard)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (traffic stop valid despite officer’s subjective motive)
- Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (reasonable mistake of law can support a stop)
- Dayton v. Erickson, 76 Ohio St.3d 3 (probable-cause inquiry focuses on what officer knew at time of stop)
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (standard of appellate review for suppression rulings)
- State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357 (trial court as factfinder and credibility determinations)
- State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 19 (appellate deference to trial court factual findings)
- State v. Spellacy, 132 N.E.3d 1244 (Eighth Dist. applying objective-reasonableness/mistake doctrine to traffic-stop legality)
- Westlake v. Kaplysh, 118 Ohio App.3d 18 (officer need not prove offense beyond reasonable doubt to justify investigative stop)