State v. Jackson
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as State v. Jackson, 2011-Ohio-494.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY State of Ohio Appellee Court of Appeals No. L-10-1227 Trial Court No. CR0200902473 v. Michael L. Jackson Appellant DECISION AND JUDGMENT Decided: February 4, 2011 ***** Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and Evy M. Jarrett, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Jerome Phillips, for appellant. ***** HANDWORK, J. {¶ 1} Appellant, Michael L. Jackson, appeals from his conviction entered by the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas in the above-captioned case. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. {¶ 2} On July 29, 2009, appellant was indicted on nine counts of drug-related charges. Appellant moved to suppress evidence obtained during the execution of a search warrant, but the trial court denied the motion, finding that the affidavit for the warrant was sufficient to establish probable cause for the search. The trial court additionally found, as an alternative basis for denying the motion to suppress, that police officers executed the warrant in good faith. {¶ 3} Following the denial of his motion to suppress, appellant pled no contest to: (1) a charge of possession of crack cocaine in violation of R.C. 2925.11(A) and (C)(4)(f), with a major drug offender specification pursuant to R.C. 2941.1410; and (2) a charge of aggravated trafficking in drugs in violation of R.C. 2925.03(A)(2) and (C)(1)(c). Appellant was sentenced to serve 14 years in prison, and he was ordered to pay a $10,000 fine. {¶ 4} Appellant filed a timely appeal, raising the following as his sole assignment of error: {¶ 5} "The trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion to suppress all evidence seized as a result of a May 1, 2009 search of the residence at 5329 Cowan." {¶ 6} This court has fully and carefully reviewed the record and the law that is applicable to the undisputed facts of this case. We find that the trial court's March 25, 2010 opinion and judgment entry is an appropriate and lawfully correct discussion of the facts and law involved in this appeal. We therefore adopt the trial court's well-reasoned 2. opinion and judgment entry as our own (see Appendix A), and find the single assignment of error not well-taken.1 {¶ 7} For all of the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Appellant is ordered to pay the costs of this appeal pursuant to App.R. 24. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App.R. 27. See, also, 6th Dist.Loc.App.R. 4. Peter M. Handwork, J. ____________________________ JUDGE Mark L. Pietrykowski, J. Thomas J. Osowik, P.J. CONCUR. ____________________________ JUDGE ____________________________ JUDGE This decision is subject to further editing by the Supreme Court of Ohio's Reporter of Decisions. Parties interested in viewing the final reported version are advised to visit the Ohio Supreme Court's web site at: http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/?source=6. 1 Although there exists certain inaccuracies in the citations set forth in Appendix A, we note that the attendant law is good. 3.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
