2017 Ohio 9114
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- On Oct. 29, 2015 Anthony Rice was involved in a two-car crash; officer observed signs of impairment, administered SFSTs, arrested him for OVI, and found 28 grams of marijuana on him.
- A breath test produced a .171 g/210L result (above Ohio’s high-tier threshold); a urine sample was collected but later discarded without testing.
- Rice was charged with OVI (impaired), OVI per se (high-tier breath), and reckless operation; jury convicted on all counts; trial court merged OVI and OVI per se for sentencing but nevertheless imposed multiple sentences.
- Pretrial, Rice moved to dismiss for due process based on destruction of the urine sample and moved to suppress for lack of probable cause; both motions were denied.
- At trial the state offered eyewitness testimony (911 caller) and officer testimony corroborated by dash-cam and breath-test authentication; the other driver’s statements to police were admitted via officer testimony over objection.
- The court affirmed convictions for OVI per se and reckless operation, found no due-process or suppression error, held the hearsay admission harmless, but vacated a void sentence imposed for the merged OVI count and remanded to correct the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether destruction of urine sample violated due process | State: disposal not bad faith; sample not shown materially exculpatory | Rice: urine was materially exculpatory or at least potentially useful given breath result barely above high-tier | No due-process violation; sample not shown materially exculpatory and no bad faith |
| Whether officer had probable cause to arrest for OVI | State: totality of observations (SFST failures, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, erratic behavior, crash) supported probable cause | Rice: signs were accident-related; no odor/admission/open container so no probable cause | Probable cause existed under Homan; arrest upheld |
| Whether admission of other driver’s out-of-court statements (via officer) was reversible hearsay error | State: either non-hearsay or admissible as excited utterance; any error harmless | Rice: testimony was inadmissible hearsay and prejudicial | If error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given breath test and eyewitness evidence |
| Whether convictions were against manifest weight of the evidence | State: breath result, eyewitness 911 corroboration, officer observations support verdicts | Rice: breath result marginal; testimony conflicting about fault and impairment | Convictions for OVI per se and reckless operation not against manifest weight; sentence for merged OVI count void and vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (police bad-faith standard for destroyed potentially useful evidence)
- California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (materially exculpatory destruction requires preservation to satisfy due process)
- Illinois v. Fisher, 540 U.S. 544 (application of Youngblood standard)
- State v. Powell, 132 Ohio St.3d 233 (Ohio discussion of materially exculpatory v. potentially useful evidence)
- State v. Homan, 89 Ohio St.3d 421 (probable-cause standard for OVI under totality of circumstances)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (manifest-weight review standard)