2017 Ohio 5484
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- In December 2015 a confidential informant (CI) conducted a controlled buy; Benny Wilson met the CI at a known West Wayne Street address, left, went briefly to a multi-unit building at the Wayne/Collett corner, returned, and the CI produced cocaine to police.
- Police obtained a search warrant for the property identified as "402 N. Collett Street" (described architecturally as a yellow two-story multifamily dwelling with a covered porch and cedar siding) after presenting an affidavit and recorded oral testimony to the issuing judge.
- Officers executed the warrant, searched the intended unit, recovered drugs, two firearms, and $2,124; post-entry they observed the street number "864" above a mailbox and later determined the parcel address was 864 West Wayne Street.
- Wilson was indicted on multiple drug counts and possession/forfeiture specifications; he pleaded no contest to Count Six (possession of cocaine) with specifications and Count Seven (aggravated possession) with a firearm specification; other counts were dismissed per plea agreement.
- Pretrial, Wilson moved to suppress the evidence and separately to exclude the oral testimony presented to the magistrate (arguing Crim.R. 41(C)(2) required transcription and attachment before the warrant); the trial court denied both motions.
- The court sentenced Wilson to an aggregate 8 years, ordered forfeiture of the money and firearms, and Wilson appealed; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether oral testimony presented to the magistrate must be transcribed and attached to the affidavit before issuance of the warrant under Crim.R. 41(C)(2) | State: Rule permits recorded testimony and later transcription; transcription before suppression hearing suffices | Wilson: Rule requires transcription and attachment (or incorporation by reference) prior to issuance of warrant; absent that, testimony must be excluded | Court: Crim.R. 41(C)(2) does not require transcription before issuance; transcription by suppression hearing is sufficient; denial of motion to exclude affirmed |
| Whether the warrant lacked probable cause or failed to sufficiently describe the place to be searched (wrong street number/address) | State: Affidavit, CI-controlled buy, and observation of Wilson entering the searched unit provided probable cause; architectural/location description enabled officers to locate correct unit | Wilson: Incorrect street/address (402 vs. 864) and multi-unit structure made description inadequate and negated probable cause | Court: Description (house number, architectural details, porch/door location) allowed officers to identify intended unit; controlled-buy facts supported probable cause; warrant and search upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (establishes the totality-of-the-circumstances test for probable cause)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule)
- State v. George, 45 Ohio St.3d 325 (magistrate must have a substantial basis for finding probable cause)
- State v. Pruitt, 97 Ohio App.3d 258 (description sufficient if officer can, with reasonable effort, identify place to be searched)
- State v. Shingles, 46 Ohio App.2d 1 (minor ministerial defects — e.g., transcription remaining to be done — do not necessarily invalidate a warrant)