State v. Wertz
89 N.E.3d 667
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- April 4, 2015: Officer Robert Lingo responded to an anonymous report describing a white male "Josh" pushing a dirt bike near 5225 Rucks Road.
- Lingo saw Joshua Wertz in the side/backyard of the residence pushing a motorized dirt bike through a gap in the fence toward an open field.
- Lingo called for Wertz to stop and to come over; Wertz complied, produced photo ID, and Lingo recorded the VIN after looking for it on the bike.
- At the time, Lingo found no indicia of criminal activity and the LEADS check for the bike returned not stolen; Lingo logged the interaction as a field interview and then released Wertz.
- Approximately one year later, Lingo (now a detective) linked the recorded VIN to a stolen dirt bike and arrested Wertz for receiving stolen property; Wertz moved to suppress the evidence from the April encounter.
- Trial court denied the suppression motion; Wertz pled no contest, was convicted, and appealed asserting the encounter was nonconsensual and the VIN recording was an unlawful seizure/search.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the April 4 encounter was consensual (implicating Fourth Amendment) | Wertz: Lingo's command to stop and come over, questioning, ID check, and VIN search while on Wertz's private property amounted to a nonconsensual investigatory detention and seizure; evidence should be suppressed | State/Lingo: Interaction was consensual — officer merely asked Wertz to come speak, did not use force or threats, and left after the encounter | Court: Reversed trial court — encounter was not consensual; reasonable person in Wertz's position would not have felt free to leave; suppression issue remanded for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (distinguishes consensual encounters, investigatory stops, and arrests under Fourth Amendment)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (U.S. 1973) (state must prove consent to search was voluntary under totality of circumstances)
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (U.S. 1980) (defines seizure by show of authority such that a reasonable person would not feel free to leave)
- State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (Ohio 2003) (standard of appellate review for suppression: factual findings deferential, legal conclusions de novo)
- State v. Smith, 45 Ohio St.3d 255 (Ohio 1989) (officer saying "come here" did not alone convert consensual encounter into a seizure)