OH9: Collective knowledge doctrine applies to reasonable suspicion

The collective knowledge doctrine applies to reasonable suspicion, too. State v. Freeman, 2015-Ohio-2501, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 2400 (9th Dist. June 24, 2015).

Defendant called 911 about the pregnant deceased falling down stairs. He showed the officer text messages from her phone on his phone, but she had to take the phone from him because his hands were shaking. The phone was taken as evidence, but it wasn’t searched until later by search warrant, as they were supposed to do. There was probable cause for issuance of search warrants for the phones and surveillance videos around the house based on the officer’s reasonable belief that the deceased was dead long before the 911 call. He was convicted of strangling her. State v. Holland, 2015 Minn. LEXIS 367 (June 24, 2015).*

Officers saw a gun scope, and they feared a weapon. Defendant claimed the scope came from a paintball gun, and they took him home so he could show them. That was not an arrest. “Taking the defendant to his residence so as ‘to give him a chance to verify his story’ thereby dispelling any further suspicion that he was engaging in criminal activity did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights since ‘a Terry stop is not confined to the momentary, on-the-street detention.’ Michigan v Summers, 452 U.S. 692, 700, 101 S. Ct. 2587, 69 L. Ed. 2d 340 (1981); McCargo, supra at 198. Putting the defendant in handcuffs and placing him in the back seat of the patrol car was a legitimate exercise of caution so as to protect the safety of the officers while they drove the defendant to his residence. At no time did the defendant object to going to his residence for the purpose of determining whether his story about the ‘scope’ and paintball gun was true after the officers advised him of their intentions.” United States v. Juarbe, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184187 (W.D.N.Y. April 23, 2014).*