State v. Perkins
2012 Ohio 2544
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Officer Creech observed Perkins fail to signal a turn from Speedway and drive erratically, prompting a traffic stop.
- While following, Creech saw weaving and a rear tire cross a right-side line with hash marks; he activated lights as Perkins turned onto North 6th Street and West Walnut Street and stopped.
- Perkins exhibited slurred speech, red eyes, and smelled of alcohol; he failed field sobriety tests and blew 0.233 on the breath test.
- In January 2011 Perkins was charged with operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol in Miami County Municipal Court.
- Perkins moved to suppress all evidence from the stop; the municipal court denied the motion and later overruled it in writing; Perkins pleaded no contest.
- On appeal, Perkins argues the stop was illegal; the court upholds the stop, determining the officer had reasonable and articulable suspicion; the judgment is affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the stop supported by reasonable and articulable suspicion? | Perkins argues Creech’s testimony and memory gaps undermine credibility. | Creech testified to failure to signal and erratic driving, corroborated by records. | Yes, stop supported by reasonable suspicion. |
| Should the credibility determinations in the suppression ruling be disturbed? | Discrepancies show memory lapses; credibility should favor defense. | Trier of fact may credit one witness over another; credibility resolved by court. | No reversal; credibility determinations left to the trial court. |
| What is the proper burden of proof in a suppression proceeding? | State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. | Burden in suppression is preponderance of the evidence. | Preponderance standard applies in suppression proceedings. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Retherford, 93 Ohio App.3d 586 (2d Dist.1994) (credible findings support suppression denial when supported by competent evidence)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 188 ((1968)) (establishes reasonable suspicion standard for stops)
- Dayton v. Erickson, 76 Ohio St.3d 3 (1996) (signaling turn as a traffic-violation basis for stop)
- State v. Leifheit, 2009-Ohio-6268 (2d Dist. Champaign No. 09CA17) (preponderance standard in suppression proceedings)
- State v. Snyder, 2004-Ohio-2229 (5th Dist. Licking No. 03 CA 59) (credibility determinations in suppression depend on trial court)
- State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357 (1992) (trial court credibility determinations upheld on appeal)