State v. Addison
This text of 2022 Ohio 2440 (State v. Addison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[Cite as State v. Addison, 2022-Ohio-2440.]
COURT OF APPEALS GUERNSEY COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO : JUDGES: : Hon. Earle E. Wise, Jr., P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee : Hon. W. Scott Gwin, J. : Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. -vs- : : MICHAEL A. ADDISON : Case No. 21 CA 20 : Defendant-Appellant : OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 20CR164
JUDGMENT: Affirmed
DATE OF JUDGMENT: July 14, 2022
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant
JASON R. FARLEY MICHAEL J. CONNICK 627 Wheeling Avenue 45 North 4th Street Cambridge, OH 43725 Suite 2B Zanesville, OH 43701 Guernsey County, Case No. 21 CA 20 2
Wise, Earle, P.J.
{¶ 1} Defendant-Appellant, Michael A. Addison, appeals the May 26, 2021 denial
of his motion to suppress by the Court of Common Pleas of Guernsey County, Ohio.
Plaintiff-Appellee is state of Ohio.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
{¶ 2} On July 20, 2020, the Guernsey County Grand Jury indicted appellant on
one count of failure to comply with the order or signal of a police officer in violation of R.C.
2921.331 and one count of aggravated possession of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.11.
Said charges arose after his parole officer received a tip appellant may be in possession
of firearms. Law enforcement attempted to arrest appellant pursuant to an arrest warrant,
but appellant fled on his motorcycle. A chase ensued until appellant crashed his
motorcycle and sustained injuries. Methamphetamine was found on the roadway among
appellant's belongings.
{¶ 3} On January 14, 2021, appellant filed a pro se motion to suppress, claiming
an illegal arrest. A hearing was held on May 10, 2021, at which appellant was represented
by counsel. By judgment entry filed May 26, 2021, the trial court denied the motion,
finding probable cause to stop and arrest appellant pursuant to a warrant. The trial court
further found even if there had not been a warrant for appellant's arrest, appellant's
actions after the stop led to probable cause for his arrest.
{¶ 4} On July 15, 2021, appellant pled no contest to the charges. By judgment
entry filed July 21, 2021, the trial court found appellant guilty and sentenced him to a total
aggregate term of thirty-six months in prison. Guernsey County, Case No. 21 CA 20 3
{¶ 5} Appellant filed an appeal and this matter is now before this court for
consideration. Assignment of error is as follows:
I
{¶ 6} "THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DENYING APPELLANT'S MOTION TO
SUPPRESS EVIDENCE."
{¶ 7} In his sole assignment of error, appellant claims the trial court erred in
denying his motion to suppress. We disagree.
{¶ 8} As stated by the Supreme Court of Ohio in State v. Leak, 145 Ohio St.3d
165, 2016-Ohio-154, 47 N.E.3d 821, ¶ 12:
"Appellate review of a motion to suppress presents a mixed question
of law and fact." State v. Burnside, 100 Ohio St.3d 152, 2003-Ohio-5372,
797 N.E.2d 71, ¶ 8. In ruling on a motion to suppress, "the trial court
assumes the role of trier of fact and is therefore in the best position to
resolve factual questions and evaluate the credibility of witnesses." Id.,
citing State v. Mills, 62 Ohio St.3d 357, 366, 582 N.E.2d 972 (1992). On
appeal, we "must accept the trial court's findings of fact if they are supported
by competent, credible evidence." Id., citing State v. Fanning, 1 Ohio St.3d
19, 20, 437 N.E.2d 583 (1982). Accepting those facts as true, we must then
"independently determine as a matter of law, without deference to the
conclusion of the trial court, whether the facts satisfy the applicable legal
standard." Id. Guernsey County, Case No. 21 CA 20 4
{¶ 9} As the United States Supreme Court held in Ornelas v. U.S., 517 U.S. 690,
699, 116 S.Ct. 1657, 134 L.Ed.2d 94 (1996):
We therefore hold that as a general matter determinations of
reasonable suspicion and probable cause should be reviewed de novo on
appeal. Having said this, we hasten to point out that a reviewing court
should take care both to review findings of historical fact only for clear error
and to give due weight to inferences drawn from those facts by resident
judges and local law enforcement officers.
{¶ 10} Appellant makes a nebulous argument that any evidence seized should
have been suppressed under the doctrine of derivative evidence. The derivative evidence
rule "holds that evidence is illegally seized, and must be suppressed, when its discovery
was the product of a constitutional violation." State v. Adams, 2d Dist. Montgomery No.
24184, 2011-Ohio-4008, ¶ 20. " 'There must be a causal connection between the
constitutional violation and the derivative evidence for the latter to be suppressed. This
stands to reason because the latter is excluded solely because of its connection to the
constitutional violation.' Katz, 'Ohio Arrest, Search and Seizure,' 2008 Ed., § 28:3." Id.
{¶ 11} We do not find a constitutional violation in this case.
{¶ 12} At the time of this incident, appellant was on parole. His parole officer, Brian
Jackson, was informed appellant may be in possession of firearms. May 10, 2021 T. at
46-47. Officer Jackson went to appellant's home to conduct a home visit and look for
weapons, but no one was home. Id. at 47. Pursuant to Adult Parole Authority policies Guernsey County, Case No. 21 CA 20 5
and procedures, Mr. Jackson obtained a warrant to arrest appellant (State's Exhibit B).
Id. at 47-51. The warrant was issued by the chief of the Adult Parole Authority.
{¶ 13} Guernsey County Sheriff's Deputy Cory May was aware of the arrest
warrant for appellant. Id. at 7, 40-41. While on patrol, he observed appellant on the side
of the road. Id. at 7. He approached appellant and told him he was under arrest. Id. at
8-9. Appellant fled on his motorcycle. Id. at 9. A chase ensued reaching speeds up to
110 m.p.h. Id. The chase stopped when appellant crashed his motorcycle and sustained
injuries. Id. In order to attend to appellant's injuries, emergency personnel were required
to cut off appellant's clothing. Id. at 11, 29. Two baggies containing methamphetamine
were found on the roadway among the clothing cut from appellant (State's Exhibit A). Id.
at 11. Footage from Deputy May's body camera corroborates his testimony (Defendant's
Exhibit 1).
{¶ 14} Appellant testified and recalled Deputy May pulling up on him and indicating
to him that he was under arrest. Id. at 74, 76, 84-85.
{¶ 15} In its May 26, 2021 judgment entry denying the motion to suppress, the trial
court found Deputy May had probable cause to stop and arrest appellant pursuant to the
arrest warrant. The trial court further found even if there had not been a warrant for
appellant's arrest, appellant's actions after the stop in failing to comply with Deputy May's
order and fleeing the scene led to probable cause for his arrest. State v. Adams, 2d Dist.
Montgomery No. 24184, 2011-Ohio-4008. We agree with the trial court's analysis.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2022 Ohio 2440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-addison-ohioctapp-2022.