OH8: Cell phone not ordered returned because of its potential use in evidence

Defendant’s cell phone was still potential evidence in his retrial, so it won’t be ordered returned to him. State v. Metz, 2019-Ohio-3370, 2019 Ohio App. LEXIS 3440 (8th Dist. Aug. 22, 2019).

Officers approached defendant’s house for a welfare check, and defendant fled and abandoned drugs when officers approached. The purpose of the coming to the house was reasonable, and defendant’s actions led to reasonable suspicion. United States v. Hardy, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143828 (E.D. Ky. Aug. 19, 2019).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.