{"id":5278,"date":"2011-03-22T09:41:10","date_gmt":"2011-03-13T00:23:08","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-03-12T14:06:29","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5278","title":{"rendered":"OH6: Officer did not violate curtilage by walking down driveway to back door"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Getting no answer at defendant\u2019s door, believing someone inside, the officer went down the driveway to the side door and saw a shell casing in plain view. This was not an illegal entry onto the curtilage. There was no privacy fence blocking anyone\u2019s view. \u201cAbsent a warrant, police have no greater rights on another\u2019s property than any other visitor has. Thus, it has been held that the only areas of the curtilage where officers may go are those impliedly open to the public.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sconet.state.oh.us\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/6\/2011\/2011-ohio-1142.pdf\">State v. Tallent<\/a>, 2011 Ohio 1142, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 947 (6th Dist. March 11, 2011).*<\/p>\n<p>The trial court\u2019s findings that there was no evidence of defendant\u2019s bad driving was not supported by the record, so the suppression order is reversed. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sconet.state.oh.us\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/9\/2011\/2011-ohio-1054.pdf\">State v. Liscoe<\/a>, 2011 Ohio 1054, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 904 (9th Dist. March 9, 2011).*<\/p>\n<p>Defense counsel was not ineffective for not challenging the search of his vehicle that was clearly with probable cause after his admissions of meth use. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sconet.state.oh.us\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/6\/2011\/2011-ohio-1144.pdf\">State v. England<\/a>, 2011 Ohio 1144, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 949 (6th Dist. March 11, 2011).*<\/p>\n<p>Cracked windshield did not justify a stop where the state could not show with photographs that the crack impaired the driver\u2019s ability to see to drive. Suppression affirmed. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sconet.state.oh.us\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/8\/2011\/2011-ohio-1074.pdf\">State v. McWhorter<\/a>, 2011 Ohio 1074, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 933 (8th Dist. March 10, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5278\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5278","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5278","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5278"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5278\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5278"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5278"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5278"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}