State v. Null
2020 Ohio 3222
Ohio Ct. App.2020Background
- Trooper stopped Kathryn Null for speeding (69 mph in a 55 mph zone). Null does not contest the legality of the stop.
- Trooper detected a "slight" odor of alcohol and observed glassy eyes; Null initially denied drinking and took longer-than-expected to produce documents and exit her vehicle.
- Officer had Null sit in the patrol cruiser for about six minutes while he completed a citation; upon returning, he testified the odor was "a little stronger," and Null then admitted to one beer around 3:00 p.m.
- Trooper performed HGN (4 of 6 clues), Walk-and-Turn (5 clues), and One-Leg Stand (terminated for safety); Null was arrested and later registered .097 BAC on a breath test.
- Null moved to suppress (arguing lack of reasonable articulable suspicion to require field sobriety tests) and to dismiss; trial court denied suppression; Null pleaded no contest to OVI and was convicted and sentenced.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer had reasonable articulable suspicion to request field sobriety tests | Officer: totality of circumstances (speeding, odor, glassy eyes, delayed responses, subsequent admission) justified suspicion | Null: only a "slight" odor and minimal indicators; not enough to detain further or require FSTs | Court: held reasonable suspicion existed under totality of circumstances; suppression denied |
| Whether trial courts finding that the odor "intensified" in the cruiser was against the manifest weight of evidence | State: trooper testified odor was "a little stronger" after Null was in backseat, supporting "intensified" finding | Null: trooper consistently called the odor "slight" and cruiser divider would limit odor transfer; trial court mischaracterized evidence | Court: trooper expressly testified odor was stronger after cruiser detention; "intensified" is a fair characterization; finding sustained |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (standard of appellate review for suppression decisions; mixed question of law and fact)
- State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357 (1992) (trial court as factfinder at suppression hearings; deference to credibility findings)
- State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 19 (1982) (accept trial-court factual findings supported by competent, credible evidence)
- State v. McNamara, 124 Ohio App.3d 706 (1997) (de novo review of legal conclusions from suppression hearings)
- State v. Evans, 127 Ohio App.3d 56 (1998) (factors relevant to reasonable suspicion for DUI/FSTs)
- United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for reasonable suspicion)