probable cause to search vehicle

• State v. McCorvey, (Ohio 2011)

CRIMINAL LAW - SEARCH & SEIZURE - informant tip; probable cause; three classes of informant; anonymous informant; known informant; identified citizen informant; canine alert provides probable cause to search vehicle; negative search following canine alert does not provide probable cause to search vehicle's occupant.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Police Could Seize Car Passenger's Purse, Rules Washington Court of Appeals

Police did not need probable cause to retain custody of an automobile passenger's purse while awaiting a search warrant for the vehicle, the Washington Court of Appeals has ruled in affirming a drug conviction. The defendant was a passenger in an SUV that police stopped based on probable cause that the vehicle contained drugs. When the defendant got out, she left her purse on the floorboard of the vehicle.

• Lawyers USA
• February 23, 2012

• State v. Miller, (Ohio 2011)

CRIMINAL LAW - SEARCH & SEIZURE - where police have probable cause to search vehicle, they are authorized to search vehicle and seize contraband without exigent circumstances; automobile exception applies whether vehicle is searched on highway or on private property because exception is based on mobility of automobiles and the reduced expectation of privacy in an automobile; for exception to apply, vehicle need not be readily mobile due to lesser expectation of privacy.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Williams, (Ohio 2010)

Motion to suppress, traffic stop, drug dog, canine sniff, reasonable detention, Fourth Amendment, reasonable suspicion, investigatory stop, probable cause to search vehicle.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Evans, (Ohio 2011)

The smell of marijuana by a person qualified to recognize the odor, is sufficient to establish probable cause to search a motor vehicle. Defendant’s no-contest plea made counsel’s failure to file a motion to suppress his confession irrelevant. By pleading no contest, the defendant admitted to the truth of the facts alleged in the indictment. Crim.R.11(B)(2).

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Dudley, (Ohio 2012)

The trial court erred in suppressing crack cocaine found in the defendant’s pocket during a traffic stop. The smell of marijuana emanating from the stopped vehicle gave police probable cause to search the vehicle for contraband. That search revealed marijuana remnants on the driver’s seat. As a result of that discovery, police were justified in extending the stop to investigate further. In response to lawful questioning, the defendant admitted possessing a baggie of marijuana. That admission gave police probable cause to search the defendant for more drugs, and exigent circumstances dispensed with the need for a warrant. As a result, the trial court erred in suppressing crack cocaine found in the defendant’s coat pocket. Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Battle, (Ohio 2011)

Trial court erred in granting motion to suppress evidence. Because there was probable cause to believe there was contraband in the vehicle, the automobile exception allowed a warrantless search of the vehicle.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Cleveland v. Cunningham, (Ohio 2011)

Trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress; the record supported the trial court’s conclusion that the officer had probable cause to make a warrantless arrest. Officer’s search of the vehicle did not contravene the untied states supreme court’s decision in Arizona v. Gant.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Bostwick, (Ohio 2011)

CRIMINAL LAW: manifest weight of the evidence, sufficiency of the evidence, circumstantial evidence, possession, manufacture, controlled substance, ineffective assistance of counsel, probable cause, motion to suppress, motor vehicle, search, methamphetamines.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Cox, (Ohio 2010)

Warrentless search was legal since police had probable cause to search a motor vehicle. Inflammatory comments by prosecution did not affect the sentence given.

• Ohio Supreme Court