State v. Whitfield, 2020 Ohio 2929

Officers stopped a vehicle for excessive window tinting in a high-violence patrol area; LaWayne Whitfield was the passenger.
After a brief conversation, one officer said he smelled an uncertain "weird" odor; another testified he smelled marijuana; a third did not.
Officers called a K9 unit; while waiting, they ordered the occupants out of the car.
Wells frisked Whitfield; during the pat-down he felt a hard lump and said he sensed marijuana; officers handcuffed Whitfield and retrieved a baggie containing ten grams of cocaine and a scale.
The trial court granted Whitfield’s motion to suppress, finding no identifiable odor of marijuana, no suspicious or threatening conduct, and thus no probable cause or justification for the search.
The state appealed; the appellate court affirmed, deferring to the trial court’s credibility findings and holding the frisk unconstitutional under Terry.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the odor of marijuana provided probable cause to search Whitfield’s person	Officers smelled marijuana; under State v. Moore odor alone can establish probable cause to search	Trial court found no identifiable marijuana odor on the record; thus no probable cause	Affirmed suppression: appellate court defers to trial court’s credibility finding that there was no identifiable odor, so Moore did not justify the search
Whether the frisk was lawful under Terry (reasonable belief person is armed and dangerous)	Frisk was routine after removing occupants for officer safety and before a K9 sniff	No specific, articulable facts showed Whitfield was armed or dangerous; no furtive or suspicious behavior on video	Frisk unlawful under Terry; officers failed to articulate facts supporting a reasonable belief Whitfield was armed and dangerous; suppression affirmed

State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 (2000) (odor of marijuana can establish probable cause to search a person in some circumstances)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (officer may conduct limited frisk when reasonable, articulable suspicion exists that person is armed and dangerous)
Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963) (evidence inadmissible if fruit of unconstitutional search or seizure)
State v. Bacher, 170 Ohio App.3d 457 (2007) (warrantless searches are per se unreasonable unless exception applies)
State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152 (2003) (trial court as factfinder entitled to resolve credibility on suppression issues)
Seasons Coal Co. v. City of Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (1984) (appellate courts should not reverse credibility determinations lightly)
Miller v. Miller, 37 Ohio St.3d 71 (1988) (trial court observations of witnesses carry weight on appeal)
State v. Evans, 67 Ohio St.3d 405 (1993) (Terry standard requires specific facts showing person is armed and dangerous)
State v. Ward, 98 N.E.3d 1257 (2017) (burden on state to justify warrantless searches)