Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 2004–2024 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Gonzales, Wd-07-060 (1-16-2009)green1 sentence2024Wood No. WD-07-060, 2009-Ohio-168, ¶ 6 (vehicle search proper where officer stopped a vehicle for a license plate violation and smelled “a strong odor of raw marijuana emanating from the passenger compartment upon approaching the vehicle.”). {¶ 29} The search of appellant’s car was also properly supported by probable cause. | 1 | 1 |
In re Ohio Criminal Sentencing Statutes Casesgreen1 sentence2024“The smell of marijuana, alone, by a person qualified to recognize the odor, is sufficient to establish probable cause to conduct a search.” State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 , 734 N.E.2d 804 (2000), syllabus; see also State v. Farris, 109 Ohio St.3d 519 , 2006- Ohio-3255, 849 N.E.2d 985, ¶ 12 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Farrisgreen1 sentence2024“The smell of marijuana, alone, by a person qualified to recognize the odor, is sufficient to establish probable cause to conduct a search.” State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 , 734 N.E.2d 804 (2000), syllabus; see also State v. Farris, 109 Ohio St.3d 519 , 2006- Ohio-3255, 849 N.E.2d 985, ¶ 12 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Maysgreen2 sentences2013No. 2008-P-0085, 2009-Ohio-2530 , ¶ 25 (stop occurred in the early morning hours; there was a moderate odor of alcohol; appellant admitted that he had been drinking); also Mays, 119 Ohio St.3d 406 , 2008-Ohio-4539 , 894 N.E.2d 1204, at ¶ 21 (where “the trooper observed appellant drift across the white fog line on two occasions * * *, and after approaching the vehicle and speaking with appellant [and noticing that he had bloodshot, glassy eyes and smelled of alcohol], the trooper had probable cause to arrest him for driving while under the influence of alcohol”). {¶25} In fact, there is conside 2013No. 2008-P-0085, 2009-Ohio-2530 , ¶ 25 (stop occurred in the early morning hours; there was a moderate odor of alcohol; appellant admitted that he had been drinking); also Mays, 119 Ohio St.3d 406 , 2008-Ohio-4539 , 894 N.E.2d 1204, at ¶ 21 (where “the trooper observed appellant drift across the white fog line on two occasions * * *, and after approaching the vehicle and speaking with appellant [and noticing that he had bloodshot, glassy eyes and smelled of alcohol], the trooper had probable cause to arrest him for driving while under the influence of alcohol”). {¶25} In fact, there is conside | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Moore
green
2 sentences2024“The smell of marijuana, alone, by a person qualified to recognize the odor, is sufficient to establish probable cause to conduct a search.” State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 , 734 N.E.2d 804 (2000), syllabus; see also State v. Farris, 109 Ohio St.3d 519 , 2006- Ohio-3255, 849 N.E.2d 985, ¶ 12 . 2024“The smell of marijuana, alone, by a person qualified to recognize the odor, is sufficient to establish probable cause to conduct a search.” State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 , 734 N.E.2d 804 (2000), syllabus; see also State v. Farris, 109 Ohio St.3d 519 , 2006- Ohio-3255, 849 N.E.2d 985, ¶ 12 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Ornelas v. United States
green
1 sentence2023Ornelas, supra. Moreover, due weight should be given “to inferences drawn from those facts by resident judges and local law enforcement officers.” Ornelas, supra at 698 , 116 S.Ct. at 1663 . {¶11} Appellant first argues the stop was prolonged beyond the time required to issue a citation for the license plate violation, and the officers lacked additional probable cause to believe she committed a crime to justify further detention. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Woods
green
1 sentence2023Licking No. 12-CA-19, 2013-Ohio-1136 , 2013 WL 1209351 , ¶ 60. {¶31} In the instant case, the trial court found the traffic stop was justified by Weirich’s suspicion of a license-plate violation per R.C. 4513.05(A), which requires the Delaware County, Case Nos. 22CAA090062 and 22CAA090063 10 following in pertinent part: “Either a tail light or a separate light shall be so constructed and placed as to illuminate with a white light the rear registration plate, when such registration plate is required, and render it legible from a distance of fifty feet to the rear.” Appellant acknowledges our de | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Griffith
neutral
1 sentence2013Montgomery No. 24275, 2011-Ohio-4476, ¶ 15 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Swain, Unpublished Decision (5-30-2006)
neutral
1 sentence2008The majority is likewise correct in noting that the propriety of an investigative stop is viewed under the totality of the circumstances as "viewed through the eyes of the reasonable and prudent police officer" reacting to events "as they unfold." Colby , 2004-Ohio-343 , at ¶ 21 (citation omitted). {¶ 30} Furthermore, as the majority notes, R.C. 4513.33 provides that "[a]ny police officer having reason to believe that the weight of a vehicle and its load is *Page 9 unlawful may require the driver of said vehicle to * * * submit to a weighing." Swain , 2006-Ohio-2727 , at ¶ 16 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Colby, Unpublished Decision (1-16-2004)
neutral
1 sentence2008The majority is likewise correct in noting that the propriety of an investigative stop is viewed under the totality of the circumstances as "viewed through the eyes of the reasonable and prudent police officer" reacting to events "as they unfold." Colby , 2004-Ohio-343 , at ¶ 21 (citation omitted). {¶ 30} Furthermore, as the majority notes, R.C. 4513.33 provides that "[a]ny police officer having reason to believe that the weight of a vehicle and its load is *Page 9 unlawful may require the driver of said vehicle to * * * submit to a weighing." Swain , 2006-Ohio-2727 , at ¶ 16 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Anderson
green
2 sentences2004State v. Anderson (1995), 100 Ohio App.3d 688 , 654 N.E.2d 1034 . {¶ 19} It is uncontested that Trooper Woodyard possessed the requisite probable cause to justify stopping the van for a license plate violation. 2004State v. Anderson (1995), 100 Ohio App.3d 688 , 654 N.E.2d 1034 . {¶ 19} It is uncontested that Trooper Woodyard possessed the requisite probable cause to justify stopping the van for a license plate violation. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.