State v. Hampton, Appellate Case No. 2020-CA-5
| Decision Date | 28 May 2021 |
| Docket Number | Appellate Case No. 2020-CA-5 |
| Parties | STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellant v. STACY W. HAMPTON Defendant-Appellee |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
2021 Ohio 1834
STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
STACY W. HAMPTON Defendant-Appellee
Appellate Case No. 2020-CA-5
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DARKE COUNTY
May 28, 2021
Trial Court Case No. 2020-CR-64
(Criminal Appeal from Common Pleas Court)
OPINION
DEBORAH QUIGLEY, Atty. Reg. No. 0055455, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Darke County Prosecutor's Office, 504 South Broadway Street, Greenville, Ohio 45331 Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellant
DAVID ROHRER, Atty. Reg. No. 0042428, 537 South Broadway, Suite 204, Greenville, Ohio 45331 Attorney for Defendant-Appellee
TUCKER, P.J.
Page 2
{¶ 1} Plaintiff-appellant, the State of Ohio, appeals from the trial court's final order of October 29, 2020, in which the court sustained a motion to suppress filed by Defendant-appellee, Stacy W. Hampton. Raising one assignment of error, the State argues that the trial court erred by ordering the suppression of evidence obtained by police officers during a traffic stop because the officers took Hampton into custody and interrogated him without delivering a Miranda warning. We hold that the trial court erred by finding that the officers subjected Hampton to a custodial interrogation, and therefore, the court's order is reversed.
{¶ 2} At 1:11 a.m. on May 8, 2020, Officers Monnin and Jones of the Greenville Police Department stopped Hampton in his vehicle on East Main Street in Greenville, after they observed Hampton driving the vehicle in excess of the posted speed limit. The officers requested a K-9 unit when they initiated the stop.
{¶ 3} Officer Monnin approached, verified Hampton's identity and asked Hampton whether he had anything illegal in his vehicle. Hampton answered that he did not know and asked whether Officer Monnin planned to conduct a search. Officer Monnin rejoined that Hampton should have been aware of the contents of his own vehicle, prompting Hampton to deny that the vehicle contained anything illegal. By Officer Monnin's account, Hampton "was stumbling over his words, [appearing to be] very nervous," and "[h]is hands were shaking," which led the officer to ask Hampton to step out of his vehicle and stand on the adjacent sidewalk. Transcript of Suppression Hearing 13:15-13:22, Oct. 15, 2020. At that point, Officer Monnin returned to his vehicle to prepare a traffic citation, while Officer Jones stood on the sidewalk with Hampton. The officers did not
Page 3
place Hampton in handcuffs or otherwise restrain him, and although they did not conduct a pat-down search, they did relieve him of a knife that was visibly protruding from a pants pocket.
{¶ 4} Officer Monnin began writing the traffic citation at approximately 1:15 a.m. At 1:22 a.m., a dispatcher informed Officer Monnin that the K-9 unit was still several minutes from the scene. The K-9 unit arrived approximately five minutes later, as Officer Monnin was completing the traffic citation.
{¶ 5} Officer Monnin then approached Hampton and asked him again, twice, whether he had anything illegal in his vehicle. Hampton admitted that he did have "all kinds" of illegal items in the vehicle, including illicit methamphetamines. At approximately 1:28 a.m., the officers placed Hampton in handcuffs and delivered a Miranda warning. In light of Hampton's admission, the officers did not have the K-9 unit perform a free air sniff-search. The officers, instead, searched Hampton's vehicle themselves, discovering quantities of marijuana and methamphetamines, as well as various drug paraphernalia.
{¶ 6} Hampton was indicted on May 14, 2020, for one count of aggravated possession of drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.11(A). On September 23, 2020, Hampton moved to suppress the evidence obtained during the traffic stop, and the trial court sustained the motion in its decision of October 29, 2020. The State timely filed a notice of appeal on November 2, 2020.
{¶ 7} For its assignment of error, the State contends that:
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW WHEN IT
Page 4
FOUND THAT AN OFFICER REQUESTING A LAWFULLY STOPPED DRIVER TO STEP OUT OF THEIR [sic] VEHICLE DURING THE COURSE OF A ROUTINE TRAFFIC STOP PLACES THE DRIVER "IN CUSTODY" AND THEREBY REQUIRING [sic] THE DRIVER BE ADVISED OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS PURSUANT TO MIRANDA V. ARIZONA.
{¶ 8} According to the State, the trial court mischaracterized Officer Monnin and Jones's permissible exercise of discretion as a display of authority equivalent to taking Hampton into custody. The State maintains that the officers did not take Hampton into custody merely by ordering him to exit his vehicle or by relieving him of a weapon he carried visibly on his person, and because Hampton was not in custody at the time he made certain incriminating statements, the State argues that the trial court erred by ordering the suppression of the statements in reliance on Miranda.
{¶ 9} The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 8, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); see also State v. Taylor, 138 Ohio App.3d 139, 145, 740 N.E.2d 704 (2d Dist.2000) (noting "the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Section 14, Article 1" of the Ohio Constitution "protect the same interests in a consistent manner"). Warrantless searches and seizures violate this prohibition unless conducted pursuant to one of the "few specifically established and well-delineated exceptions." (Citations omitted.) Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 357, 88 S.Ct. 507, 19 L.Ed.2d 576 (1967). One of these exceptions "is commonly known as an investigative or Terry stop," which includes the temporary detention of motorists for the enforcement of traffic laws. State v. Dorsey...
To continue reading
Request your trial