OH5: Plain view didn’t apply to a firearm where it wasn’t readily obvious it was stolen

The plain view doctrine did not apply because the firearm was not immediately apparent as incriminating evidence or contraband, and testimony at the suppression hearing established the officers could not readily identify the firearm as stolen. State v. Elschlager, 2017-Ohio-5545, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 2613 (5th Cir. June 26, 2017).

Merely being present with the consent of the landowner doesn’t give standing to contest a search or a reasonable expectation of privacy. Here, the landowner consented. State v. Thomas, 2017-Ohio-5501, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 2587 (2d Dist. June 23, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Reasonable expectation of privacy. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.