Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Amand

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Montgomery

August 30, 2019

STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JENNIFER ST. AMAND Defendant-Appellant

          Criminal Appeal from Municipal Court Trial Court Case No. 2018-TRC-8851

          ANDREW D. SEXTON, Atty. Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee

          MICHELLE M. MACIOROWSKI, Atty. Attorney for Defendant-Appellant

          OPINION

          DONOVAN, J.

         {¶ 1} Defendant-appellant Jennifer St. Amand appeals her conviction for one count of operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol ("OVI"), in violation of R.C. 4511.19(A)(1)(d). St. Amand filed a timely notice of appeal with this Court on January 15, 2019.

         {¶ 2} The incident which formed the basis for St. Amand's conviction occurred shortly after midnight on October 23, 2018, when St. Amand was driving northbound in her motor vehicle on Brown Street in Dayton, Ohio. University of Dayton Police Officer Phet Phong, who was on patrol in the area, testified that he began following St. Amand's vehicle after he observed her speeding. Officer Phong testified that he did not measure St. Amand's speed with a radar gun, but he believed she was speeding based upon his training and experience.

         {¶ 3} While following St. Amand, Officer Phong observed her cross over the center line in the roadway by approximately one foot. Officer Phong testified that St. Amand then turned onto Wyoming Street. Officer Phong testified that he continued following St. Amand after she turned and observed her once again cross over the center line by approximately one foot. Thereafter, Officer Phong activated his overhead lights and initiated a traffic stop of St. Amand. Officer Phong testified that instead of pulling over to the side of the road next to the curb, St. Amand abruptly stopped her vehicle while it was still in the roadway.

         {¶ 4} Officer Phong exited his cruiser and walked over to the front passenger side door of St. Amand's vehicle and directed her to roll down the window. Officer Phong testified that St. Amand then proceeded to roll down her rear passenger side window rather than the front passenger side window. St. Amand then corrected herself and rolled down the front passenger side window to speak with Officer Phong. Officer Phong testified that, at this point, St. Amand "seemed disoriented," and he detected the slight odor of alcohol while he spoke with her.

         {¶ 5} Officer Phong testified that he directed St. Amand to produce her driver's license, her vehicle registration, and her proof of insurance card. However, St. Amand only presented her driver's license and a medical card to Officer Phong. Officer Phong testified that St. Amand never produced her vehicular insurance card or her registration during the stop. Thereafter, Officer Phong asked St. Amand if she had been drinking alcohol that night, and she replied that she had not. Based upon his training and 14 years of law enforcement experience, Officer Phong believed that St. Amand was operating her vehicle under the influence of alcohol. Accordingly, Officer Phong ordered St. Amand out of the vehicle and directed her to perform the walk and turn field sobriety test. Officer Phong testified that he observed that St. Amand was unsteady on her feet and was swaying from side to side. Having failed the field sobriety test, Officer Phong ultimately cited St. Amand for OVI, and rather than transport her to the county jail pending arraignment, he released her into the custody of her mother.

         {¶ 6} At her arraignment on October 30, 2018, St. Amand pled not guilty to the charged offense. On November 15, 2018, St. Amand filed a motion to suppress the results of the field sobriety test, specifically arguing that that Officer Phong did not have a reasonable articulable suspicion to administer the field sobriety test on the night of the stop. A hearing was held on said motion on December 13, 2018. Ruling from the bench, the trial court overruled St. Amand's motion to suppress. Immediately after the motion to suppress was overruled, St. Amand pled no contest to one count of OVI, and the trial court found her guilty of the offense. The trial court sentenced St. Amand to six months of basic supervised probation and ordered her to attend the Weekend Intervention Program (W.I.P.).

         {¶ 7} It is from this judgment that St. Amand now appeals.

         {¶ 8} St. Amand's sole assignment of error is as follows:

         THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN OVERRULING THE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO SUPPRESS AS THE OFFICER DID NOT HAVE A REASONABLE ARTICULABLE SUSPICION THAT DEFENDANT WAS UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL.

         {¶ 9} In her assignment, St. Amand contends that the trial court erred when it overruled her motion to suppress. Specifically, St. Amand argues that Officer Phong did not have a reasonable articulable suspicion ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.