 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Riffle6/12/2000
JUDGMENT: Reversed and Remanded
Reader, V.J. Defendant-appellant Ronald L. Riffle appeals his conviction and sentence entered by the Stark County Court of Common Pleas on one count of driving while intoxicated, in violation of R.C. 4511.19(A)(1). Plaintiff-appellee is the State of Ohio.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE
On September 20, 1999, the Stark County Grand Jury indicted appellant on one count of driving while intoxicated, in violation of R.C. 4511.19(A)(1), a felony of the fourth degree based upon appellant's three previous DUI convictions within the past six years. At his arraignment on September 24, 1999, appellant entered a plea of not guilty to the charge. Appellant filed a Motion to Suppress on November 1, 1999. The trial court conducted a hearing on the motion on November 10, 1999. At the suppression hearing, Deputy Mark Maskaluk of the Stark County Sheriff's Department testified he and his partner, Deputy Jason Peters, responded to a disturbance call in the area of Moore Avenue and Sherrick Avenue in Canton Township at approximately 6: 30 p.m on July 14, 1999. The call involved a woman who was yelling and screaming. Deputy Maskaluk explained the area of Moore and Sherrick Avenues was rural, however, he and his partner were familiar with it because they had been there on numerous calls of suspect vehicles, drunk drivers, drug use, and vehicles parked along the roadway. The deputies did not see any vehicles as they traveled into the area. When they arrived, they noticed a vehicle parked on the west side of the road, which the deputies felt could possibly be involved in the disturbance call to which they were responding. Deputy Maskaluk activated his overhead lights. The driver of the vehicle immediately began to drive away. The deputy motioned for the driver to back-up and situated his cruiser to the front of the vehicle. Deputies Maskaluk and Peters exited the cruiser and approached the vehicle. The deputies asked the driver, who was later identified as appellant, for identification and his reason for being in the area.
Appellant could not produce a driver's license, but gave the deputies his name, social security number and date of birth. Upon speaking with appellant, Deputy Maskaluk noticed the smell of alcohol and his speech was slurred. The deputies asked appellant to exit the vehicle. The deputies administered three field sobriety tests, all of which appellant failed.
Inside the vehicle, the deputies found an open container of beer. On cross-examination, Deputy Maskaluk stated the dispatcher had not provided the officers with a description of a vehicle or a person. He noted appellant was alone in the vehicle. The deputy also acknowledged he did not observe appellant commit any traffic infractions and appellant's vehicle did not present a traffic hazard parked in the location in which the deputy observed it. Deputy Maskaluk explained appellant seemed suspicious because the officer believed the disturbance could be a domestic incident and, because appellant is a male, he could possibly be involved. Deputy Jason Peters testified similarly to Deputy Maskaluk. He acknowledged they did not see a woman in the area. Deputy Peters also stated appellant did not respond to the inquiry as to why he was in the area. He explained appellant was not asked to exit his vehicle until the deputies discovered indicia of alcohol use. Via Judgment Entry filed November 12, 1999, the trial court denied appellant's motion to suppress. Thereafter, on November 17, 1999, appellant withdrew his plea of not guilty and entered a plea of no contest.
The trial court found appellant guilty of driving under the influence and sentenced appellant to
Page 1 2 3 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|