OH: “The arrest of a recent occupant of a legally parked vehicle does not, by itself, establish reasonableness to justify a warrantless search of the vehicle the arrestee had been riding in.”

The Ohio Supreme Court today reversed a case where I criticized the court of appeals decision back in June 2014 as wrong. The Supreme Court today held that the arrest of a recent occupant of a car does not ipso facto give reason to search the car. State v. Leak, 2016-Ohio-154, 2016 Ohio LEXIS 82 (Jan. 20, 2016) (see Court News Ohio, Warrantless Search of Legally Parked Car Violated Man’s Constitutional Rights by Dan Trevas):

{¶ 1} Appellant, Quayshaun Leak, was arrested on a warrant following a domestic-violence incident. Immediately prior to his arrest, he was a passenger in a car legally parked on a public street. In this case, we are asked to determine whether the warrantless inventory search of a lawfully parked vehicle violates the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 14 of the Ohio Constitution. We conclude that in this case, it does.
{¶ 2} The state urges us to adopt a rule of law stating that the arrest of a recent occupant of a legally parked vehicle establishes an exception to the prohibition of unreasonable searches. We decline to do so. The arrest of a recent occupant of a legally parked vehicle does not, by itself, establish reasonableness to justify a warrantless search of the vehicle the arrestee had been riding in. Accordingly, we reverse the Fifth District’s denial of Leak’s motion to suppress evidence of the gun that was found in the unlawful search of the car in which Leak had been a passenger, and we vacate his convictions and sentence for carrying a concealed weapon and for improper handling of a firearm.

h/t for notice today from the Public Defenders who overturned the court of appeals.