State v. Pugh
2013 Ohio 1238
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Armed drive-thru robberies occurred fall 2011; three masked men stole cash, cigars, cigarettes, and a cigar box during the first two robberies, with a later robbery in progress leading to pursuit.
- Officer Adams and Humphrey pursued two robbers; Pugh was seen fleeing toward a house at 1313 Kingsley Avenue and entered the home.
- Police obtained written consent from Tiffany Selmon, a resident, to search the house; they found a black jacket with distinctive white stitching matching surveillance video and other items tied to the robberies.
- Two days later, Selmon consented to search for the cigar box from the first robbery; the box was located and identified by the drive-thru owner.
- Pugh was indicted for three counts of aggravated robbery with firearm specifications; he moved to suppress the second search as involuntary, but the suppression motion was denied and he was convicted.
- The court affirmed the suppression ruling and held the convictions were not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Selmon’s consent validly permitted the second search. | Pugh argues Selmon wasn’t authorized to consent for him. | Selmon had common authority over the shared residence. | Yes; Selmon’s consent was valid under common authority. |
| Whether the evidence is weighty given suppression ruling. | If suppression stands, convictions are invalid as weight of evidence undermined. | suppression proper; evidence remains adequate. | Convictions affirmed; weight not improper given suppression ruling. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (U.S. 1974) (permit search by third-party with common authority permitted)
- Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (U.S. 2006) (co-tenant’s consent necessary when objecting party present)