2022 Ohio 2071
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- On July 6, 2019, Sgt. Metzger stopped Brian Scott after observing a seatbelt violation and apparent weaving; Scott stopped with rear tires on the stop line and his truck protruding into the crosswalk.
- Metzger detected a strong odor of alcohol, slurred speech, and a staggered gait; Scott reported an 11-year-old left-leg injury and no glasses.
- Metzger administered field sobriety tests: HGN showed 6/6 clues, walk-and-turn showed 2/8 clues, and one-leg-stand was later suppressed by the magistrate.
- Scott moved to suppress all FST evidence and statements, arguing the stop lacked reasonable suspicion (seatbelt alone, lawful stop on stop line, and non-actionable weaving) and that HGN timing violated NHTSA standards; he also argued his leg injury invalidated balance tests.
- The magistrate denied suppression except for the one-leg-stand; found probable cause to arrest based on odor, slurred speech, staggered gait, HGN results, and observed driving.
- Scott filed objections late; the trial court overruled them as untimely, so appellate review was limited to plain error. The municipal court conviction and sentence for OVI were affirmed on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer had reasonable, articulable suspicion to stop Scott for violating R.C. 4511.13(C)(1)(a) (stop line/crosswalk) | State: Stop justified because vehicle was over the stop line and protruded into crosswalk; officer reasonably (objectively) believed a violation occurred; good-faith mistake of law supports stop | Scott: Stopping "at" the stop line is not unlawful; seatbelt violation alone cannot justify a stop; weaving within a lane is not a marked-lanes violation | No plain error; stop justified. Because statute is ambiguous and vehicle entered the crosswalk, officer’s interpretation was objectively reasonable (Heien), so suppression not warranted |
| Whether field sobriety tests (particularly HGN) were administered in substantial compliance with NHTSA standards | State: Metzger substantially complied; NHTSA timing is approximate; HGN 6/6 plus odor/slurred speech supported probable cause | Scott: Metzger moved stimulus too quickly for smooth pursuit/onset/maximum-deviation phases; his leg injury invalidates walk-and-turn and one-leg-stand results; officer not certified | No plain error. Trial court correctly found substantial compliance for admitted tests; one-leg-stand was suppressed below, but other evidence (HGN 6/6, odor, slurred speech, staggered gait) gave probable cause independent of walk-and-turn |
Key Cases Cited
- Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (2014) (an objectively reasonable mistake of law can justify a traffic stop)
- State v. Mays, 119 Ohio St.3d 406 (2008) (traffic stop is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment requiring reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Schmitt, 101 Ohio St.3d 79 (2004) (officer testimony about FSTs admissible if administered in substantial compliance with NHTSA)
- State v. Hill, 92 Ohio St.3d 191 (2001) (plain-error standard and reversal only in exceptional circumstances)
- State v. Long, 53 Ohio St.2d 91 (1978) (plain-error reversal limited to preventing manifest miscarriage of justice)
- State v. Baah, 72 N.E.3d 205 (2016) (examples of factors that can support probable cause in OVI: driving manner, odor, speech, coordination, FST performance)