By Lucas Daprile
cleveland.com
CLEVELAND, Ohio — If a police officer stops a car thinking the driver had a nonworking headlight, but then learns they were wrong, they do not have to immediately let the driver go.
That’s the latest ruling from the Ohio Supreme Court in a 2018 case where Quentin Fips, 36, said Linndale police illegally searched him. That search resulted in police finding drugs and a scale in his car, prompting in felony charges.
| DOWNLOAD: Governing AI in policing — What law enforcement leaders need to know
Police initially pulled Fips over because they believed one of the headlights on his car was out, according to a briefing from the Supreme Court.
Police asked Fips for his license, but he provided his social security number instead. The officer then asked about Fips’ headlight, and Fips showed them his headlights were working, and that it was only the fog light that was nonfunctional.
Police then checked Fips’ social security number and found he had a warrant for his arrest and did not have a valid driver’s license.
From there, police arrested Fips and searched his car, finding 47 grams of crack cocaine and a scale.
Fips filed a motion with the court to toss the evidence obtained in the search of his car, saying police should have ended the traffic stop once they learned his headlights were, in fact, working.
First, the trial court denied his request, then the Eighth District Court of Appeals changed course, siding with Fips.
The Ohio Supreme Court sided with police, saying officers were within their rights to continue the traffic stop because they still had to run Fips’ social security number through the police database, which then led them to discover the arrest warrant.
“The mission of a lawful traffic stop includes confirming that a licensed driver is in the driver’s seat of the car,” according to the court’s majority opinion, written by Justice Joseph Deters. “This remains true even if further investigation dispels the reasonable suspicion that prompted the stop.”
Justices Deters, Patrick DeWine, Jennifer Brunner, Daniel Hawkins and Megan Shannahan sided with the majority.
Chief Justice Sharon Kennedy sided with prosecutors but wrote her own opinion because she argued her colleagues incorrectly applied a previous case’s precedent to the Fips case.
Justice Patrick Fischer dissented, saying the appeal should not have been accepted. Fischer did not detail the reason why.
Do you think officers should be allowed to continue a stop after the initial reason is disproven? Why or why not?
Police1 readers respond:
- I agree for the reason given by the court. DL must be checked. If valid and no other evidence is found, the drive must be allowed to continue. (unless permission to search is granted by the driver.)
- The stop was still a valid stop, the vehicle has defective equipment. Thus, the stop was still valid and the identification of the driver was valid.
- The suspect’s downfall was that he did not have a license, which is also already a citation they identified him by other means and found he had a warrant. In this case it seems warranted however I believe if you had had the proper ID, etc., then there is no reason to continue to stop when it is showing that the officer was misinformed.
- In this case yes, because he failed to provide his license and needed to be ID’d. If he hadn’t been driving with faulty fog lights, he wouldn’t have been stopped. If he showed his license and didn’t have a warrant...he’d have been fine.
- Absolutely not, if they are allowed to, they will be able to pull anyone over without a reason.
- This is so stupid. cops should be able to search anyone, anywhere, any place. Why should criminals be allowed to go free ? I thought having drugs was a crime.
- Just throw probable cause or reasonable suspicion right out the window why don’t ya and go right in to a fishing expedition. Your rights don’t matter anymore in America.
- In this particular case, I believe the officers should be able to prolong the stop because the driver did not have a DL. I believe there is reason to determine if the driver was licensed. If the driver produces a valid DL, registration and insurance, I think the stop should end there.
©2026 Advance Local Media LLC. Visit cleveland.com.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
