OH4: No answer during a knock-and-talk permitted officers to go to the back door to knock

A knock-and-talk that goes unanswered permits the officers to go to the back door without violating Jardines, following Miller v. State, 342 Ark. 213, 27 S.W.3d 427 (2002). There they smelled a chemical odor. State v. Ash, 2015-Ohio-4974, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 4810 (4th Dist. Nov. 13, 2015).

Defendant was walking down an alley and encountered a police paddy wagon. The officer driving knew defendant from other encounters. He “rolled down the driver’s side window as appellant approached and asked appellant what he was up to. There is no evidence that [he] raised his voice to appellant or commanded appellant to stop. Nevertheless, appellant stopped walking and answered [the] question.” The officer asked defendant if he’d consent to a search of his person, and he agreed. It was all by consent. State v. Hannah, 2015-Ohio-4964, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 4791 (10th Dist. Dec. 1, 2015).*

Failure to raise a Fourth Amendment claim in the motion to suppress is a waiver. It wasn’t raised here until oral argument. City of Columbus v. Ridley, 2015-Ohio-4968, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 4807 (10th Dist. Nov. 19, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Curtilage, Knock and talk. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.