State v. Shuttlesworth
2014 Ohio 5206
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- On Nov. 18, 2013, Ohio State Highway Patrol Sgt. Walter stopped Shuttlesworth for following too closely and crossing the fog line; both sergeants approached the vehicle.
- Sgt. Beidelschies testified he smelled a "very strong" odor of raw marijuana from the vehicle and later a "strong" odor coming from Shuttlesworth after he exited the car.
- Based solely on his olfactory detection, Beidelschies searched Shuttlesworth’s person and found a sandwich bag with 1,066 Oxycodone pills; no marijuana was found in the vehicle.
- Shuttlesworth was indicted for aggravated possession of drugs; he moved to suppress the pills as the fruit of an illegal search.
- The trial court found Beidelschies’ testimony that he smelled marijuana on Shuttlesworth not credible and granted the suppression motion.
- The State appealed under Crim.R. 12(K); the appellate court reviewed the trial court’s factual credibility findings with deference and reviewed legal conclusions de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the search of Shuttlesworth’s person was supported by probable cause based on an officer’s detection of marijuana odor | The State: Beidelschies’ training and testimony that he smelled a strong odor of raw marijuana provided probable cause to search | Shuttlesworth: The officer’s olfactory claim was not credible and thus insufficient to establish probable cause | Court: Affirmed—trial court’s credibility finding was supported by competent, credible evidence, so no probable cause existed |
Key Cases Cited
- Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (U.S. 1967) (searches require Fourth Amendment analysis and warrant or exception)
- Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (U.S. 1961) (evidence from unreasonable searches must be suppressed)
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (Ohio 2003) (standard of review for suppression rulings: deference to trial court factual findings; legal conclusions reviewed de novo)
- State v. Carter, 72 Ohio St.3d 545 (Ohio 1995) (trial court is best positioned to assess witness credibility at suppression hearings)
- State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 (Ohio 2000) (probable cause must be based on objective facts)
- State v. McNamara, 124 Ohio App.3d 706 (Ohio Ct. App.) (de novo review of legal conclusions in suppression context)
- State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357 (Ohio 1992) (deference to trial court in resolving factual disputes and credibility)