State v. Turner
2021 Ohio 541
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- On August 5, 2018 Trooper Jordan Haggerty stopped Ryan Turner after observing Turner's vehicle drift so the two right tires "touched" the right-hand solid white fog line; the tires did not cross the line. Turner was cited for a marked-lanes violation (R.C. 4511.33) and OVI (R.C. 4511.19).
- Turner moved to suppress OVI-related evidence, arguing the stop lacked probable cause and reasonable articulable suspicion because mere touching of the fog line is not a lanes violation.
- The municipal court granted the motion to suppress, finding touching the fog line did not establish probable cause for a stop.
- The state appealed. This court (Turner I) initially held an officer who observes driving on a marked lane line has reasonable suspicion; the Ohio Supreme Court (Turner II) later held touching the fog line is not a violation and remanded to consider whether the stop was nevertheless valid based on the officer's reasonable mistake of law.
- On remand this court held the state forfeited the "reasonable mistake of law" justification because it never raised that theory in the trial court or at the suppression hearing; the suppression ruling was therefore affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether touching (but not crossing) the fog line gives probable cause or RAS for a traffic stop | Trooper/state: observing tires on the marked lane line indicates a lanes violation and supplies reasonable and articulable suspicion/probable cause | Turner: mere touching does not violate R.C. 4511.33 and thus provides no basis for the stop | Ohio Supreme Court answer (Turner II): touching the fog line is not a violation and does not create probable cause; (on remand) this court affirmed suppression because state waived other defenses |
| Whether an officer's reasonable mistake of law can validate the stop when the state raises it for the first time on appeal | State: even if no PC/RAS, the stop is lawful if the officer reasonably misunderstood the law | Turner: state did not raise this argument below and thus waived it; stop unlawful | This court: state failed to assert the mistake-of-law theory in the trial court or at the suppression hearing => issue waived; suppression affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996) (probable cause is the proper Fourth Amendment inquiry for traffic stops)
- Bowling Green v. Godwin, 110 Ohio St.3d 58 (2006) (Fourth Amendment and Ohio Constitution prohibit unreasonable automobile stops)
- Xenia v. Wallace, 37 Ohio St.3d 216 (1988) (state bears burden to justify a traffic stop when suppression is sought)
- Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (1997) (parties ordinarily may not raise new arguments on appeal)