State v. Thomas
Citations
- 2019 Ohio 4486
Syllabus
The trial court did not err by overruling appellant's motion to suppress drugs found during a pat-down search and his statements made to the police. The initial traffic stop was lawfully made for a traffic violation, and it was not unlawfully prolonged. Appellant's conduct and the surrounding circumstances gave the officer reasonable grounds to suspect that appellant may have had a weapon. Appellant was advised of his Miranda rights. His later admission was not the fruit of a poisonous tree. Judgment affirmed. (Donovan, J., concurring in judgment only.)
Judges: Hall
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 37,942×
- Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court· 1983-06-08· cited 16,716×
- Ornelas v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1996-06-10· cited 7,197×
- United States v. CortezSupreme Court· 1981-01-21· cited 5,975×
- United States v. SokolowSupreme Court· 1989-04-03· cited 4,647×
- United States v. ArvizuSupreme Court· 2002-01-15· cited 3,936×
- Minnesota v. DickersonSupreme Court· 1993-06-07· cited 2,669×
- State v. BurnsideOhio Supreme Court· 2003-10-22· cited 2,261×
- Rodriguez v. United StatesSupreme Court· 2015-04-21· cited 2,086×
- Illinois v. CaballesSupreme Court· 2005-01-24· cited 2,007×
- State v. AndrewsOhio Supreme Court· 1991-01-23· cited 948×
- State v. UnderwoodOhio Supreme Court· 2010-01-05· cited 724×
- City of Xenia v. WallaceOhio Supreme Court· 1988-06-22· cited 509×
- State v. HalczyszakOhio Supreme Court· 1986-08-13· cited 137×
- State v. Hawkins (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court· 2019-10-16· cited 75×
- State v. BalesOhio Court of Appeals· 2012-10-26· cited 7×
Sourced 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.