State v. Lorenzana
Citations
- 248 N.E.3d 956
- 2024 Ohio 2900
Syllabus
Drug possession drug trafficking motion to suppress drugs search of hotel room warrant consent effective assistance of counsel concession by defense counsel sufficiency manifest weight random sampling method speedy trial plain error statutory right constitutional right Barker factors sentence consecutive Reagan Tokes waiver fine indigent. Judgment affirmed remanded. The trial court properly denied appellant's motion to suppress. The appellant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy to the hotel room because he had three active warrants for his arrest, the hotel affirmatively acted to evict the appellant, the police had knowledge that the appellant was evicted, and the police had a reasonable belief that the appellant was in the hotel room. Defense counsel was not deficient. Defense counsel's concessions on the lesser counts was an attempt to gain the jury's credibility with this concession while attacking the drug testing procedure as it pertained to the other counts, which are first-degree felonies. The drug expert's testimony regarding the random sampling method sufficient to support his determination that the entire 940 pills recovered together and similarly packaged are the same controlled substance as that tested — fentanyl. Furthermore, the convictions are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Appellant's speedy trial argument can only be reviewed for plain error regarding his constitutional rights because appellant failed to raise it at the trial court. A review of the record reveals that the Barker factors weigh more heavily in favor of the State. Therefore, the appellant cannot demonstrate plain error. Lastly, appellant's consecutive sentence was proper and the trial court properly advised appellant of the Reagan Tokes requirements. However, because the trial court assessed the mandatory $10,000 fine after finding appellant indigent and waiving the fine, we remand to the trial court for the sole purpose to correct the sentencing entry to
Judges: Boyle
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.