{"id":17212,"date":"2015-05-12T07:27:56","date_gmt":"2015-05-12T12:27:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=17212"},"modified":"2015-05-12T07:27:56","modified_gmt":"2015-05-12T12:27:56","slug":"oh2-a-general-motion-to-suppress-did-not-put-state-on-notice-to-issue-it-wasnt-prepared-to-litigate-waiver-found","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=17212","title":{"rendered":"OH2: A general motion to suppress did not put state on notice to issue it wasn&#8217;t prepared to litigate; waiver found"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Defendant\u2019s motion to suppress did not put the state on notice that his primary issue was the qualifications of the drug dog and handler, so the issue was not preserved for appeal. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.supremecourt.ohio.gov\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/2\/2015\/2015-Ohio-1750.pdf\">State v. Matthews<\/a>, 2015-Ohio-1750, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 1700 (2d Dist. May 8, 2015) (Treatise \u00a7 60.30 n.6).<\/p>\n<p>The court concludes, with difficulty, that there was no probable cause for issuance of a search warrant for defendant\u2019s storage building based on what it had. The law, however, was less than crystal clear on this. Accordingly, the good faith exception would be applied because the officers acted in good faith, the magistrate did not abandon her neutral and detached role, and the case law that there was no probable cause wasn\u2019t obvious. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.supremecourt.ohio.gov\/rod\/docs\/pdf\/2\/2015\/2015-Ohio-1753.pdf\">State v. Perez<\/a>, 2015-Ohio-1753, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 1699 (2d Dist. May 8, 2015). Note: At least the court did decide the probable cause question for the future. This search is saved by the good faith exception, but the next one won&#8217;t be.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Defendant\u2019s motion to suppress did not put the state on notice that his primary issue was the qualifications of the drug dog and handler, so the issue was not preserved for appeal. State v. Matthews, 2015-Ohio-1750, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=17212\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17212","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-good-faith-exception","category-motion-to-suppress"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17212","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17212"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17212\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17213,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17212\/revisions\/17213"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17212"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17212"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17212"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}