State v. Strothers, 2012 Ohio 5062

Strothers was convicted in Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas of promoting prostitution (two counts), possessing criminal tools, and attempted promoting of prostitution; he challenges Crim.R. 29, suppression, and opinion evidence admissions.
Detective Malone and Sergeant Hicks investigated a brothel operation advertised on Backpage.com connecting to 14019 Northfield Ave., East Cleveland.
Hicks linked the phone number in Backpage ads to Strothers and to Strothers’ Facebook page; text messages and a recorded phone call implicated Strothers in arranging sex-for-hire services.
Police obtained a search warrant after confirming the office address and phone numbers; Stallings testified she worked for Strothers and participated in sex-for-hire activities.
Strothers’ assignments of error were resolved against him; the court affirmed the conviction, determining the evidence supported the offenses and the warrant was supported by probable cause.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for promoting prostitution	Strothers	Strothers	Evidence supported all elements
Probable cause for the search warrant	Strothers	Strothers	Probable cause established; suppression denied
Admission of lay opinion evidence	Strothers	Strothers	Not an abuse of discretion; admissible under Evid.R. 701

State v. Kiriazis, 2004-Ohio-502 (8th Dist. No. 82887, 2004-Ohio-502) (brothel definition and prostitution elements guidance)
State v. Mays, 2011-Ohio-2684 (2d Dist. No. 23986, 2011-Ohio-2684) (standard for suppression review; deference to magistrate probable-cause ruling)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (probable cause requires a practical, common-sense assessment)
State v. O'Connor, 2002-Ohio-4122 (12th Dist. No. CA2001-08-195) (afﬁdavit-based probable cause review is deferential to magistrate)
State v. Jackson, 2006-Ohio-1938 (8th Dist. No. 86542, 2006-Ohio-1938) (standard for sufficiency of evidence in criminal appeals)