State v. Nabors
2012 Ohio 4757
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Nabors was charged with sexual conduct with a minor (felony of the third degree) in the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court.
- Nabors moved to suppress a DNA saliva swab and his statements; the motion to suppress his statements was withdrawn at the suppression hearing.
- Detective Lewis testified Nabors, a named suspect, voluntarily attended an interview; Nabors was not under arrest and the interview room door remained open.
- Nabors consented to a DNA swab after being informed of the investigation; the swab was performed by Nabors, with detective assistance limited to explanation and envelope handling.
- The trial court found Nabors voluntarily consented to the DNA test and credited the detective’s testimony as credible; no evidence supported coercion, threats, or duress.
- Nabors pled no contest after the suppression ruling and was sentenced to five years of community control sanctions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Nabors’ DNA sample coerced or voluntary? | Nabors claims coercion or threats rendered consent invalid. | Nabors contends police coercion invalidated the consent. | Voluntary consent established; no coercion. |
| Was Nabors' statement suppression issue ineffective assistance of counsel for withdrawal of that branch? | Counsel’s withdrawal prejudiced Nabors and impaired suppression strategy. | Withdrawal was a tactical decision with no adverse effect; no ineffective assistance. | No ineffective assistance; withdrawal did not affect outcome. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (U.S. 1961) (exclusionary rule applies to illegally obtained evidence)
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1966) (requires police interrogation disclosures when custodial interrogation occurs)