State v. Reid
2013 Ohio 4274
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Traffic stop on the Ohio Turnpike (Jan. 5, 2010) led to drug charges against Reid.
- K-9 Diego alerted twice at the driver’s side door; Troopers searched passenger area and trunk.
- Purse in the trunk contained marijuana and cocaine; Reid waived rights and provided statements.
- Trial court granted Reid’s suppression motion; State appealed.
- Appellate court reversed, holding dog alert gave probable cause to search the entire vehicle.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the drug dog alert provide probable cause to search the entire car? | State contends dog alert gave probable cause to search whole vehicle. | Reid argues alert was insufficient to extend search beyond passenger area. | Yes for probable cause to search entire vehicle; search of trunk upheld. |
| Whether wind and dog reliability affect probable cause to expand search to trunk. | Wind/reliability were not controlling; alert sufficient. | Environmental conditions undermine certainty of trunk alert. | Probable cause supported extension to trunk under totality of circumstances. |
| Whether the trial court erred by limiting the scope of the search based on dog alert. | Dog alert created probable cause to search places concealing drugs. | Limited scope appropriate when trunk not alerted by dog. | Trial court erred in suppressing; search of trunk permissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (dog sniff during lawful stop does not violate Fourth Amendment)
- Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005) (dog sniff at lawful stop generally not a search)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (probable cause not needed for traffic stop itself; reasonable suspicion suffices for stop)
- State v. Carmichael, 2012-Ohio-5923 (Ohio App.) (automobile exception scope to search vehicle and its contents when probable cause exists)
- State v. Nocon, 9th Dist. Lorain No. 10CA009921 (2012-Ohio-395) (drug-dog alert can give probable cause to search the vehicle)
- State v. Almazan, 2006-Ohio-5047 (9th Dist.) (dog alert can support search of entire vehicle)
- Florida v. Harris, 133 S. Ct. 1050 (2013) (high court cautions against overreliance on field performance records of dogs)
- Gonzales, State v. Gonzales, 6th Dist. Wood No. WD-07-060 (2009-Ohio-168) (scope of search after probable cause depends on places where contraband may be found)
- United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (1982) (searches may extend to places where contraband may be found)
- Farris, 109 Ohio St.3d 519 (2006-Ohio-3255) (odor of incriminating substance alone may not establish trunk search without corroboration)