State v. Hobbs

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio held that a person serving simultaneously as a county deputy sheriff and deputy clerk of a municipal court in the same county is not a neutral and detached magistrate for purposes of determining probable cause for an arrest warrant under Crim.R. 4(A). The court affirmed that the arrest warrant was invalid but concluded that the exclusionary-rule issue was not properly before it because no evidence resulted from the defective warrant. The judgment of the court of appeals was affirmed.

Holdings

1. A person serving simultaneously as a deputy sheriff for a county and deputy clerk for a municipal court located in that county is not a neutral and detached magistrate for purposes of determining probable cause and issuing an arrest warrant under Crim.R. 4(A)(1). The arrest warrant was therefore invalid.
2. The Supreme Court of Ohio did not decide whether the exclusionary rule applies to the invalidly issued arrest warrant because no evidence was obtained as a result of the warrant and the issue was not properly before the court. The court affirmed the denial of suppression and dismissal and dismissed the discretionary appeal as improvidently accepted.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a person simultaneously serving as a county deputy sheriff and deputy clerk of a municipal court in the same county may act as a neutral and detached magistrate for purposes of determining probable cause and issuing an arrest warrant under Crim.R. 4(A)(1).
2. Whether the exclusionary rule was an appropriate remedy for the invalid arrest warrant.

Disposition

affirmed