OH2: Failure to mention an expired CCW permit justified search [?]

The fact defendant was known to have an expired concealed carry permit was reason enough to detain him when he failed to tell the officer he had a CCW permit. [If it’s expired, then he doesn’t have one?] State v. Vineyard, 2014-Ohio-3846, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 3774 (2d Dist. September 5, 2014)*:

[*P25] The report further indicated that Vineyard had a gun during prior encounters with the police and that Vineyard’s CCW permit expired a few months earlier. Officer Jones testified that an individual is required to notify the police officer at each encounter if the individual has a CCW permit and the location of the weapon. Vineyard had not informed Officer Jones that he had a CCW permit or that he had a gun in his vehicle. These facts were sufficient to create a reasonable and articulable suspicion that Vineyard might unlawfully have a firearm in his vehicle and to cause Officer Jones to be reasonably concerned for his safety. Accordingly, Officer Jones acted reasonably in requesting backup before concluding the traffic stop and in asking Vineyard about the possible presence of a gun in the vehicle prior to allowing Vineyard to drive away. Vineyard’s continued detention so that Officer Jones could confirm or dispel his concern that Vineyard might have a gun in his car without a valid CCW permit was not unlawful. And once Vineyard indicated that he had a gun in the car, Jones lawfully retrieved the gun from the vehicle.

When I was a baby lawyer, I thought that appellate judging was the highest calling in the law. See Karl N. Llewellyn, The Common Law Tradition; Deciding Appeals (1960). Then there are cases like this that just make utterly no sense to anybody, probably including the author of the opinion. Those who’ve heard me at CLEs complain about this already know what I’m referring to.