The Akron Legal News

Appellate court rules warrantless home arrest was unlawful

ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: April 13, 2015

A state appeal from the judgment of the Eastern Division of the Ashtabula County Court was overruled by the 11th District Court of Appeals recently.

The state of Ohio challenged the county court’s decision to grant a motion to suppress from Glenda Lowe, whose son was arrested in her home without a warrant.

Case summary states that, on Aug. 17, 2013, Deputy Steven Murphy of the Ashtabula County Sheriff’s Office was dispatched to an assault taking place in a private residence.

Upon arrival, Murphy made contact with the female victim, who had signs of major injury to her face and head.

Murphy also found a large clump of hair that had been pulled from the victim’s head.

The victim provided a written statement in which she recounted the events of the evening.

“Jason Lowe came to my house to hang out, he started running his mouth and I said, ‘If you’re going to come in here and act like that, then please leave,’” the victim wrote. “He left, came back, threatened me, knocked my door down, pushed me, hit me in the face, pulled my hair out, took my phone as I was trying to call the police, and threw it at my house, ruining my phone.”

The victim also stated that Jason had threatened her, stating that she was “done for” as he “peeled out” of her driveway.

She then showed Murphy threatening messages that Jason had sent her via Facebook.

Murphy then initiated an effort to locate and arrest Jason, first searching around local bars. He then proceeded to Jason’s known residence, the home of his parents, Terry and Glenda Lowe.

Murphy arrived at the Lowes’ home well after midnight and confirmed that Jason’s car was parked in the driveway.

He then approached the property’s enclosed back porch and initiated contact with Jason.

Despite being informed that he was under arrest, Jason refused to exit the home.

Case summary states that he retreated into the house, locked the porch door and began “dancing around and giving the middle finger to Deputy Murphy.”

Jason’s father, Terry, was awakened by the commotion.

He came outside, spoke to Murphy and then went back into the home to speak to his son. Murphy followed Terry onto the enclosed porch.

According to Murphy’s testimony, Jason began to walk back toward the porch and attempted to slam the house door shut.

Murphy used his foot to keep the door from closing and then discharged his Taser into Jason’s stomach.

While Murphy was handcuffing Jason, Terry and Glenda allegedly interfered with the arrest.

On Aug. 26, 2013, a complaint was filed against Glenda for interfering with a lawful arrest.

However, the trial court granted her motion to suppress “all evidence arising from the arrest and of things occurring at (Lowe’s) home” because Jason’s arrest was unlawful.

Appealing that judgment, the state argued that the trial court erred by granting a motion to suppress that was not supported by facts or law.

The court of appeals disagreed, though it noted that there was ample evidence to support probable cause to arrest Jason.

“Accordingly, whether the warrantless home arrest of Jason was constitutionally permissible depends on whether (the state) could demonstrate the existence of exigent circumstances,” Presiding Judge Timothy Cannon wrote on behalf of the court of appeals.

The reviewing panel of judges sided with the trial court when it held that there were no exigent circumstances.

Jason did not pose an ongoing threat to the victim, so it held that Murphy could have called for a warrant and monitored the residence in the meantime, instead of entering the enclosed porch, which was “an integral part of the living area.”

“It is worthy of note that this was a difficult call for the deputy and that he exercised significant restraint in dealing with Jason,” Cannon wrote. “However, it remains that the record is devoid of any explanation as to why it was not safe or reasonable to attempt to secure a warrant while Jason was in the house.”

The state also argued that Murphy was in “hot pursuit” of Jason, negating the need for an arrest warrant. The appellate panel found little to back that claim.

Quoting the trial court’s findings, Cannon wrote that “to hold that there was hot pursuit would stretch those terms beyond any recognizable logic.”

“While we do not necessarily embrace the trial court’s phrasing, we also agree that (the state’s) argument is premised on an overly-broad definition of hot pursuit,” Cannon wrote.

The reviewing court noted that Murphy did not witness any criminal activity and had no contact with Jason until he arrived at his residence, two hours after responding to the victim’s call.

“For these reasons, we do not accept (the state’s) argument that the trial court erred when it concluded that Deputy Murphy was not in hot pursuit of Jason,” Cannon concluded.

Judges Cynthia Westcott Rice and Thomas Wright joined Cannon in affirming the trial court’s decision to grant the motion to suppress.

The case is cited State v. Lowe, 2015-Ohio-1065.

[Back]