# State v. Higgins

> Ohio Court of Appeals · August 6, 2009 · 183 Ohio App. 3d 465

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6698818

## Case

- **Full name:** The STATE of Ohio v. HIGGINS
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** August 6, 2009
- **Citations:** 183 Ohio App. 3d 465; 917 N.E.2d 363
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Wise
- **Judges:** Delaney, Edwards, Wise
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6698818

## Opinion text

Wise, Presiding Judge,
concurring.
{¶ 60} I concur with the decision of the majority reversing the trial court’s grant of appellee’s motion to suppress. I write separately only to caution that although there is a clear interest in preventing contraband from entering jails and prisons, and that the state’s authority to search or seize visitors at a penal institution is broad, such authority is not absolute, even where warning signage is posted. For example, constitutional challenges may be cognizable based on discriminatory-profiling or improper-randomness standards. Thus, each Fourth Amendment claim in this arena must remain subject to a case-by-case review, as has been duly accomplished herein.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6698818. Public record. Not legal advice.