OH3: Marijuana plant in the front flower bed was PC for the house

A game warden was investigating a trespassing hunter, and the hunter claimed, showing a permission slip, that he was on defendant’s land with permission. The game warden went to defendant’s house to check it out. The house was 300′ from the road [no mention of curtilage] and he went to the front door, observing a marijuana plant 12-15″ high growing in the front flower bed. Nobody answered the door, but the officer got a search warrant for defendant’s house. One paragraph of completely unverified hearsay was in the affidavit, which should not have been there, but there was probable cause otherwise. And the GFE was enough, too. State v. Burks, 2011 Ohio 3529, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 2987 (3d Dist. July 18, 2011).*

Defendant’s car was stopped for a traffic offense, and the officer received sufficient information from other officers to give “collective knowledge” reasonable suspicion that drugs might be found to detain him long enough to get a drug dog there. The dog’s alert gave probable cause. State v. Kelley, 2011 Ohio 3545, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 2995 (4th Dist. July 14, 2011).*

The search warrant for defendant’s house was based on information from pharmacy employees who were CIs that defendant was over-purchasing pseudoephedrine, and the employees did not have to be identified to show they were believable. The showing of nexus to the house created a fair inference that evidence of methamphetamine manufacture would be found there. State v. Harper, 152 Idaho 93, 266 P.3d 1198 (App. 2011).*