The Ohio Court of Appeals has upheld the conviction of Miller Scott for cocaine trafficking and possession. The court ruled that the traffic stop leading to his arrest was lawful, despite Scott's claims of racial profiling. This decision, issued on June 30, 2026, affects Scott and sets a precedent regarding the legality of traffic stops linked to drug investigations.
The case originated from a traffic stop on June 7, 2023, when police officers pulled over Scott's vehicle after observing a minor traffic violation. During the stop, officers discovered 16.89 grams of cocaine in Scott's car. Scott appealed his conviction, arguing that the stop was racially motivated and thus unconstitutional.
Miller Scott was indicted on November 3, 2023, for trafficking in cocaine and possession of cocaine, both third-degree felonies. The charges arose after police conducted a traffic stop based on a minor violation, which led to the discovery of cocaine in his vehicle. Scott's defense claimed that the stop was pretextual and racially biased, as it occurred shortly after he left a bar known for drug activity.
The case reached the Ohio Court of Appeals after Scott's trial counsel filed a motion to suppress the evidence obtained during the traffic stop. The motion argued that the stop was unlawful due to racial profiling. The trial court held a suppression hearing on September 16, 2024, where both sides presented evidence.
During the hearing, Detective Alexander Davenport testified that he was monitoring The Copper Penny bar, a location known for drug trafficking. He observed Scott's vehicle leaving the bar and noted a traffic violation. Detective Christian Ortolani, who pulled Scott over, confirmed that he activated his body camera and that a K-9 unit was called to the scene. The K-9 alerted officers to the presence of narcotics in Scott's vehicle.
Scott testified that he had only briefly entered The Copper Penny and denied committing any traffic violations. However, the trial court found that the officers had reasonable suspicion to stop Scott based on his actions and the location he had just left. On September 30, 2024, the trial court denied Scott's motion to suppress the evidence, stating that the stop was constitutionally valid.
On March 31, 2025, Scott entered a no contest plea to the charges. The trial court sentenced him to 18 months in prison, but execution of the sentence was stayed pending appeal. Scott's appeal raised concerns about the trial court's ruling on the motion to suppress.
The Ohio Court of Appeals, led by Judge Myron C. Duhart, ruled that the trial court acted correctly in denying the motion to suppress. The court stated, "where an officer has an articulable reasonable suspicion or probable cause to stop a motorist for any criminal violation, including a minor traffic violation, the stop is constitutionally valid regardless of the officer’s underlying subjective intent or motivation for stopping the vehicle in question." This ruling reinforces the notion that traffic stops can be lawful even if they are based on ulterior motives related to drug investigations.
The court also noted that racial profiling cannot serve as a legal basis for suppressing evidence. The judges concluded that the stop was valid based on the officers' observations and the context of Scott's visit to a known drug trafficking location.
The ruling has significant implications for future cases involving traffic stops and potential racial profiling. It clarifies that officers can act on reasonable suspicion linked to drug activity, even when the stop may appear pretextual. This decision may affect how similar cases are handled in Ohio and potentially influence other jurisdictions as well.
Moving forward, Scott has the option to appeal the decision to the Ohio Supreme Court, although details about any related cases were not available in the court filing. The outcome of this case may impact discussions about racial profiling in law enforcement and the legality of traffic stops in drug-related investigations.