State v. Ross
2012 Ohio 6111
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Officer Perez stopped Ross for multiple traffic violations at 1:25 a.m. on Nov. 3, 2010; Ross and a female passenger were in the car.
- Officer Perez detected the odor of alcohol from the vehicle and retrieved Ross’s license and the passenger’s SSN for a records check.
- A mobile data check initially showed an open warrant and a suspended license, but dispatch later reported no warrants after about 11 minutes.
- Ross was detained during the ongoing stop, questioned, and consented to a search of the vehicle; a loaded handgun was found in the glove compartment.
- Ross was indicted on weapon offenses and related counts; he moved to suppress the stop and the search, which the trial court denied; he pled no contest to the charges.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the detention supported beyond the initial traffic stop? | Ross | Ross contends prolonged detention was unlawful after no warrant was found. | The detention was justified by evolving reasonable suspicion. |
| Was Ross’s consent to search voluntary or coerced? | Ross | The State failed to prove voluntary consent free of coercion. | Ross’s consent was not voluntary; suppression warranted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (U.S. 1973) (consent exception to search requires voluntary, not coerced, consent)
- Posey v. State, 40 Ohio St.3d 420 (1988) (clear evidence of voluntary consent required)
- Robinette v. State, 80 Ohio St.3d 234 (1997) (knowledge of right to refuse affects voluntariness of consent)
- State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357 (1992) (review of suppression is mixed law and fact; defer to trial court on factual questions)
- State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d 19 (1982) (standard for appellate review of suppression rulings)
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (framework for reviewing suppression and de novo legal conclusions)
- State v. Hobbs, 133 Ohio St.3d 43 (2012) (factors supporting prolonged detention and totality of circumstances)
- State v. Davenport, 2012-Ohio-4427 (9th Dist.) (duration of stop may extend to run license checks under totality of circumstances)
- State v. Batchili, 113 Ohio St.3d 403 (2007) (reasonable time to complete initial stop includes license check)