OH9: Arrest warrant for a co-occupant of the house permitted entry under Payton

Officers had an arrest warrant for a co-occupant of the house, and that permitted their entry under Payton. State v. Cecil, 2026-Ohio-1100 (9th Dist. Mar. 30, 2026).

The record on who actually consented or had apparent authority is incomplete, and that denies relief. State v. Lirette, 2026 La. App. LEXIS 565 ( La. App. 5 Cir Mar. 27, 2026).*

An interlocutory appeal of denial of a suppression order is denied. “Neither the trial court nor the Defendant highlights any inconsistent orders or opinions on the issue, however. Again, appellate review of the trial court’s ruling can occur upon entry of final judgment, if necessary. This Court has repeatedly held that Rule 9 is not an appropriate vehicle for obtaining an advisory opinion on an issue which would otherwise be available for review later on direct appeal.” State v. Abernathy, 2026 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 166 (Mar. 30, 2026).* Similar is State v. Faulkner, 2026 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 165 (Mar. 30, 2026).*

This entry was posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of proof, Issue preclusion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.