State v. Davis

2025 Ohio 2322 · Ohio Court of Appeals, Fifth Appellate District, Richland County · June 27, 2025 · No. 2024 CA 0070

Summary

This Ohio Court of Appeals decision affirms the Richland County Court of Common Pleas' judgment following the defendant's no-contest plea to charges of improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle and operating a vehicle under the influence. The defendant appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress, arguing the initial traffic stop lacked reasonable suspicion due to a disputed malfunctioning license plate light. The appellate court found that the trooper's testimony alone provided sufficient probable cause for the stop under the totality of the circumstances, thereby overruling the assignment of error and affirming the conviction.

Court
Ohio Court of Appeals, Fifth Appellate District, Richland County
Writing for the Court
Hoffman, J.; Andrew J. King, P.J.; William B. Hoffman, J.; Kevin W. Popham, J.
Jurisdiction
Ohio
Decision date
June 27, 2025
Docket number
2024 CA 0070
Procedural posture
Appeal from the Richland County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2023 CR 888R
Standard of review
De novo for legal issues; deferential for factual findings
Precedential value
published
Parties
Justin Davis v. State of Ohio
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

fourth amendmentsearch and seizureprobable causeappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

criminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court erred in finding probable cause for the traffic stop based on a non‑functioning license‑plate light
  2. Whether the trial court erred in overruling the motion to suppress evidence obtained after the stop

Holdings

  1. The trial court did not err; the officer had probable cause to stop the vehicle because a reasonable officer could infer a violation of R.C. 4513.05(A).
  2. The trial court's denial of the motion to suppress is affirmed because probable cause existed for the stop.

Key quotations

Probable cause can exist even if the officer incorrectly determines that a traffic violation has occurred or if the officer misunderstands the law that the driver is allegedly violating. The test is whether an objectively reasonable police officer would believe that a traffic violation has occurred based upon the totality of the circumstances. (¶ 20)
The trial court found Trooper Hoffer’s testimony to be credible and concluded the trooper had probable cause to stop Appellant’s vehicle. (¶ 10)

Factual background

Trooper Jesse Hoffer observed Davis's vehicle traveling southbound on State Route 13 at night, noted the rear license‑plate light was not illuminated, and stopped the vehicle. Hoffer testified he saw signs of impairment and a firearm in the vehicle. The trial court found Hoffer's testimony credible and concluded probable cause existed for the stop.

Procedural history

The trial court denied Davis's motion to suppress evidence obtained after a traffic stop based on a non‑functioning rear license‑plate light, found probable cause, and entered convictions on firearms and DUI charges. Davis appealed the denial of the motion to suppress.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Ohio Ohio Court Of Appeals Fifth Appellate District Richland County