 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. McCaulley6/10/2005
{ } The state appeals from a judgment of the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, which granted George L. McCaulley's motion to suppress evidence.
{ } The essential facts are undisputed and were set forth in the trial court's decision as follows:
{ } "On July 29, 2004, at approximately 9:40 a.m., Montgomery County Sheriff's Deputy Jay Vitali was on routine patrol on North Dixie Drive in Harrison Township. The deputy was in the parking lot of the Traveler's Motel when he noticed a 2004 Dodge Stratus pull out of the lot. He could observe a bar code in the window of the vehicle that identified it as a rental car.
{ } "The deputy described the Traveler's Motel , specifically, and the area around it, generally, as a high crime area, especially for drug, prostitution, trespass, and similar offenses. The deputy was suspicious because of the nature of the area and the rental car, and therefore followed the vehicle as it proceeded northbound on North Dixie. The deputy testified that the defendant changed lanes without signaling for at least one hundred (100) feet before he changed lanes, in violation of R.C. 4511.39.
{ } "The deputy initiated a traffic stop and noticed an odor of an alcoholic beverage, bloodshot eyes, and profuse sweating on the part of the defendant. He obtained Mr. McCaulley's driver's license and the rental agreement (which did not list the defendant as an authorized driver), and asked him to step from the car. The defendant cooperated throughout his contacts with the officer. The defendant was patted down and placed in the rear seat of the cruiser while the officer ran Mr. McCaulley's license on the computer. The computer check determined that the defendant was driving under suspension.
{ } "The officer testified that, at a minimum, he was going to write the defendant a ticket, but he was not sure at that time if he going to arrest him. The deputy stated the vehicle would have to be towed regardless, because the defendant did not have driving privileges.
{ } "Deputy Ball, an evidence technician, arrived at the scene to take photographs and, while incidentally looking back in Deputy Vitali's cruiser, noticed a large chunk of suspected crack cocaine on the driver's front seat near the crevice. Mr. McCaulley was removed from the back seat of the cruiser, notified that he was under arrest, and handcuffed."
{ } On October 6, 2004, McCaulley was indicted for possession of cocaine and possession of criminal tools. He pleaded not guilty and filed a motion to suppress evidence. After conducting a hearing on the motion, the trial court suppressed the evidence. The state raises one assignment of error on appeal.
{ } "The trial court erred in granting defendant's motion to suppress."
{ } The state contends that Officer Vitali acted reasonably in placing McCaulley in the rear of his cruiser for the purposes of protecting his personal safety and determining whether McCaulley was an authorized driver of the vehicle he had been driving. In the alternative, the state argues that even if the detention had been impermissible, the officer's error was harmless and did not warrant suppression of the evidence because the cocaine would have inevitably been discovered pursuant to a lawful investigation. In deciding to suppress the evidence, the trial court noted that the traffic stop was "quintessentially" pretextual, but that it was permissible pursuant to Whren v. United States (1996), 517 U.S. 806, 810, 116 S.Ct.1769, 135 L.Ed.2d 89, and Dayton v. Erickson (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 3, 665 N.E.2d 1091. Thus, the court determined that the traffic stop was legal. The court further found that there
Page 1 2 3 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|