2023 Ohio 3268
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- Plainclothes Officer Brian Follrod observed a pistol grip protruding from Adonis O’Neal Jr.’s front pocket after O’Neal exited a convenience store in Avondale, Cincinnati.
- O’Neal and his codefendant A.D. got into a car and drove away; Follrod, being undercover, alerted other officers rather than initiating the stop himself.
- Another officer stopped the vehicle; O’Neal and A.D. were detained and searched; no firearm was found on their persons.
- Officer Matthew Mauric observed a marijuana cigarette in the car’s center console, noted excessive window tint, and ran O’Neal’s records, learning O’Neal was prohibited from possessing firearms.
- Officers searched the vehicle believing the gun was inside; the trial court granted O’Neal’s motion to suppress the evidence recovered from the car.
- The state appealed; the appellate court reversed, holding the stop and vehicle search were lawful and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to detain O’Neal (Terry stop) | Follrod’s direct observation of a pistol grip in O’Neal’s pocket gave reasonable, articulable suspicion of unlawful weapons possession | Officers lacked reasonable suspicion/probable cause to stop or detain O’Neal | Yes. Observation of the pistol grip and lack of permit information provided reasonable suspicion to detain and investigate O’Neal |
| Whether officers had probable cause to search the vehicle under the automobile exception | After searches of the occupants found no gun and given the prior observation of the pistol, tint, and that O’Neal was prohibited from firearms, officers had probable cause to search the car for the firearm | No probable cause to search the car without a warrant; suppression appropriate | Yes. Officers had probable cause to search the vehicle for contraband (a firearm) and the automobile exception applied; suppression reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hariston, 126 N.E.3d 1132 (Ohio 2019) (explains Terry-stop reasonable-suspicion standard)
- State v. Acoff, 100 N.E.3d 87 (1st Dist. 2017) (describes automobile-exception scope for warrantless vehicle searches)
- State v. Moore, 734 N.E.2d 804 (Ohio 2000) (vehicle moveability justifies automobile exception)
- South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (U.S. 1976) (foundational Supreme Court authority on warrantless vehicle searches)
- State v. Thyot, 105 N.E.3d 1260 (1st Dist. 2018) (standard of review for suppression rulings)