State v. Wade
2019 Ohio 4565
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- On June 26, 2018, an Ohio State Highway Patrol trooper responded to a commercial truck that had left I‑70 and struck a guardrail; dash‑cam recorded the scene.
- The truck was unlocked; the trooper opened the cab and found Devon Wade passed out in the sleeper berth.
- Trooper observed a nearly empty vodka bottle in reach, signs of intoxication (glassy/constricted pupils, odor of alcohol, confusion), and initial inability/unwillingness to perform field tests; Wade admitted pulling over to sleep and having had a drink.
- EMS transported Wade to the hospital; trooper documented vehicle damage and skid/impact marks consistent with the guardrail strike.
- Wade was convicted after a bench trial of OVI (R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(a)), commercial‑driver OVI (R.C. 4506.15), open container, and failure to control; the OVI counts were merged and the court imposed a 60‑day jail sentence.
- On appeal Wade raised three assignments: (1) ineffective assistance of trial counsel (failure to file suppression motion, failure to move for acquittal, discovery issues, failure to object to testimony); (2) insufficiency of the evidence; and (3) manifest‑weight challenge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawful warrantless entry/search of truck | State: officer reasonably entered under community‑caretaking / emergency‑aid exception to check on an unresponsive occupant | Wade: entry was a warrantless search violating the Fourth Amendment | Entry was justified under the emergency/caretaking exception; suppression motion would not have succeeded |
| Probable cause that Wade operated the truck | State: single‑occupant crash + Wade’s admission on video + indicia of intoxication provided probable cause to arrest for operating while impaired | Wade: no evidence he was the driver or had a prohibited amount of alcohol; lack of chemical tests | Trooper had probable cause—Wade admitted driving and displayed signs of impairment; arrest lawful |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (suppression, Crim.R. 29, discovery, objections) | State: counsel’s omissions do not show prejudice; failure to file suppression motion is not ineffective unless it would have prevailed | Wade: counsel should have filed motions and preserved/exchanged evidence and objected to testimony | No reasonable probability of a different outcome; counsel not ineffective and errors (if any) were harmless or cumulative |
| Sufficiency and manifest weight of evidence for OVI | State: behavior, admission, open vodka bottle, officer observations suffice to prove impairment beyond reasonable doubt | Wade: insufficient proof he drank before driving, no chemical test results, alternative explanations for damage | Evidence sufficient and convictions not against manifest weight; judge did not lose his way |
Key Cases Cited
- Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006) (emergency‑aid/caretaking exception can justify warrantless entry when officers reasonably believe help is needed)
- Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973) (police community‑caretaking functions with vehicles)
- Michigan v. Fisher, 558 U.S. 45 (2009) (objective‑reasonableness test for emergency‑aid exception)
- State v. Dunn, 131 Ohio St.3d 325 (Ohio 2012) (recognizing community‑caretaking/emergency‑aid exception under Ohio law)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong ineffective assistance test)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (deferential standard for Strickland review)
- Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365 (1986) (prejudice requirement for suppression‑related ineffective assistance claims)
- State v. Schmitt, 101 Ohio St.3d 79 (2004) (officer lay testimony on intoxication admissible)
- State v. Jenks, 61 Ohio St.3d 259 (1991) (sufficiency standard in Ohio)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (manifest‑weight review standard)