State v. Stewart, 2021 Ohio 2928

Stewart (driver) and Ealom (front-passenger) were charged with drug offenses after a traffic stop on Nov. 8, 2019; the trial court granted their motions to suppress and the state appealed.
An undercover sergeant reported the white Jeep driving erratically and changing lanes multiple times without signaling, and later turning out of a gas-station lot without signaling. Uniformed detectives conducted the stop.
During the stop Det. Hess asked Ealom to exit and asked if he had weapons; Ealom said, “Yes. I have a concealed carry.” As Ealom exited, Hess observed a handgun in the front-passenger door panel and secured it.
While searching for other weapons, detectives found multiple cell phones, a large roll of blank lottery tickets, and a digital scale with drug residue; a hidden compartment in a hairbrush contained heroin and cocaine.
The trial court suppressed the evidence, reasoning the turn from the gas-station parking lot was not a violation of the signal ordinance; the court did not address other alleged violations. The court of appeals reversed and remanded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Stewart/Ealom)	Held
Lawfulness of traffic stop	Sgt. observed erratic driving and multiple lane changes without signaling and a turn without signal; those are C.C.O. violations justifying stop	Turn from private parking lot is not subject to the signal ordinance; no legitimate traffic violation occurred	Reversed suppression: record shows Sgt. observed multiple violations (lane changes, erratic driving); stop lawful
Ordering passenger out / initial questions about weapons	Officer may order occupants out during lawful stop (Mimms); asking about weapons is permissible	Detention and questioning exceeded scope of stop and lacked reasonable suspicion	Held lawful: officers may order exit during lawful stop and ask about weapons
Plain-view seizure of firearm	Discovery was inadvertent; failure to promptly inform of concealed weapon violated law and made the gun’s incriminating nature immediately apparent	Ealom promptly informed officers and had a license; no carrying-concealed violation	Held lawful: seizure under plain-view doctrine; failure to promptly inform supplied probable cause
Warrantless vehicle search and admission of drugs	Gun + indicia (lottery roll, multiple phones, scale with residue) provided probable cause under automobile exception to search vehicle	Search was fruit of illegal stop / unlawful seizure and should be suppressed	Held lawful: probable cause existed to search vehicle; evidence admissible

Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (Fourteenth Amendment makes Fourth Amendment applicable to states)
Pennsylvania v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (stopping vehicles must be reasonable under Fourth Amendment)
Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (officer may order driver out of vehicle during lawful stop)
Maryland v. Dyson, 527 U.S. 465 (automobile exception: if vehicle is mobile and probable cause exists, warrantless search permitted)
Pennsylvania v. Labron, 518 U.S. 938 (automobile exception permits search without separate exigency when probable cause exists)
State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357 (Ohio law on automobile exception and vehicle searches)
State v. Halczyszak, 25 Ohio St.3d 301 (plain-view tests: inadvertence and immediately apparent incriminating character)
State v. Williams, 55 Ohio St.2d 82 (plain-view doctrine elements)
State v. Vega, 154 Ohio St.3d 569 (discovery of indicia can supply probable cause to search containers within vehicle)
State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (standard of appellate review for suppression rulings)