Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

OH2: Frisk of defendant put in police car for officer's convenience was unjustified

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

The defendant was encountered in a high crime area, and the officer put her in the police car for “mere convenience,” and patted her down. She was not given the opportunity to identify herself, so no violation of the law occurred. Suppression order affirmed. State v. Habel, 2010 Ohio 3907, 2010 Ohio App. LEXIS 3309 (2d Dist. August 20, 2010).* The officer saw defendant in a high crime area jaywalking (a non-arrestable offense), and he stopped him. The officer frisked him because he kept his hands in his pocket [it was cold] finding heroin. The frisk was lawful. State v. Lovins, 2010 Ohio 3916, 2010 Ohio App. LEXIS 3319 (2d Dist. August 20, 2010).* Officers responding to an armed burglary call encountered the defendant in the place with a door open, with body armor at his feet...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on August 24, 2010 (boomark / email).