Ohio SC upholds use of evidence in illegal warrant search

A place for sharing news stories related to armed citizens, law enforcement & 2A/CCW topics.

Please note that when linking to an article you must cite the source URL and provide no more than a brief preview of the article to ensure fair-use standards are met.

NO DOCUMENT DUMPING.

Posts in violation of these rules are subject to immediate deletion without warning.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
M-Quigley
Posts: 4780
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Ohio SC upholds use of evidence in illegal warrant search

Post by M-Quigley »

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states ... ant-search" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The Ohio Supreme Court has upheld the use of evidence obtained by police who illegally enter a residence while executing a search warrant.

The court said in a 6-1 decision Tuesday that the "knock-and-announce" principle offers different protections than those in situations where police illegally enter a property without a search warrant.

Justice William O'Neill, writing for the majority, says the requirement that police announce their presence and explain their purpose is meant to protect residents surprised by the appearance of police.

O'Neill says throwing out evidence is the wrong response to police violation of that rule.
The article doesn't say what the right response supposedly is. In reality nothing is going to happen to any police that violate this rule, as long as things go right. If things go wrong however, like the police get an address wrong, or get an incorrect drug related tip, and conduct a no knock and announce at a house where the occupants might mistake it for a home invasion, then what happens?
User avatar
JediSkipdogg
Posts: 10257
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: Batavia
Contact:

Re: Ohio SC upholds use of evidence in illegal warrant searc

Post by JediSkipdogg »

This will most likely be appealed to the next level as I think other state supreme courts have ruled similarly and differently on this matter. It's just time until the Supreme Court hears it and it will be interesting how they rule.
Carrying Concealed Handguns - Signage Answers

Ohio Concealed Carry Classes in S/W Ohio
http://www.ProShootersTraining.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am not a lawyer. My answers are based on research, knowledge, and are generally backed up with facts, the Ohio Revised Code, or the United States Code.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Ohio SC upholds use of evidence in illegal warrant searc

Post by DontTreadOnMe »

I'm not sure this will be appealed. SCOTUS may not even have jurisdiction to review it. A more detailed summary of this case is available at http://www.courtnewsohio.gov/cases/2017 ... d7FSmiPKM8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Mahoning County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office appealed the ruling to the Seventh District Court of Appeals. The Seventh District reversed the trial court, finding the facts in Bembry and Singh’s case were “virtually identical” to those in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2006 Hudson v. Michigan case. The Hudson case determined that the exclusionary rule under the Fourth Amendment does not apply to a knock-and-announce violation.

Bembry and Singh appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which agreed to consider whether Ohio’s own constitutional provision against illegal search and seizure in Article I, Section 14 has greater protections than the federal constitution and should apply to their case.
So the question at issue was whether the evidence should be excluded under the Ohio constitution. The SCOTUS has no jurisdiction on that question. The only way this would be heard at the federal level is to re-consider the question of whether the state courts were correct to apply the Hudson v. Michigan precedent.

For those who are interested, a brief summary of the federal Hudson v. Michigan case, including an explanation of why the court decided the evidence should not be excluded, is at https://www.oyez.org/cases/2005/04-1360" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

FWIW, I think this exception was unnecessary and that the already-existing inevitable discovery and exigent circumstances exceptions apply. Police had a warrant and would have gotten the evidence anyway (inevitable discovery exception), unless the defendant had taken the opportunity of the delay to destroy the evidence (exigent circumstances exception). Then again, I'm not a supreme court justice so what do I know.
User avatar
deanimator
Posts: 7863
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:34 pm
Location: Rocky River

Re: Ohio SC upholds use of evidence in illegal warrant searc

Post by deanimator »

M-Quigley wrote:f things go wrong however, like the police get an address wrong, or get an incorrect drug related tip, and conduct a no knock and announce at a house where the occupants might mistake it for a home invasion, then what happens?
The citizen dies, but who cares? It's not like he's a cop or anything...
Life comes at you fast. Be prepared to shoot it in the head when it does.
Post Reply