Ohio DUI Law; Mays fog-line decision upheld

State v. Burwell, 2010-Ohio-1087, 12-09-06 (OHCA3)

This case originated in the Putnam County Court.  “In his first assignment of error,  argues that the trial court erred by overruling his motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of the traffic stop. Specifically,  argues that crossing the white edge line without evidence of erratic driving or concerns for his safety does not provide reasonable articulable suspicion for a traffic stop, citing State v. Phillips, 3d Dist. No. 8-04-25, 2006-Ohio-6338.  also maintains that this case is distinguishable from State v. Mays, 119 Ohio.St.3d 406, 2008-Ohio-4539, 894 N.E.2d 1204, because: he only crossed the  line once and the defendant in Mays crossed the line twice; he was not weaving within his lane as was the defendant in Mays; and the officer here, unlike in Mays, initiated the traffic stop based on a “hunch or gut feeling.” The court disagreed, basically upholding the fog-line decision set forth in State v. Mays, 119 Ohio.St.3d 406, 2008-Ohio-4539, 894 N.E.2d 1204.