[Cite as State v. Valiente-Mendoza, 2018-Ohio-3090.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WOOD COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. WD-16-067 Appellee Trial Court No. 2016CR432 v. Juan Valiente-Mendoza DECISION AND JUDGMENT Appellant Decided: August 3, 2018 ***** Paul A. Dobson, Wood County Prosecuting Attorney, David T. Harold and Channa B. Beard, Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys, for appellee. Lawrence A. Gold, for appellant. ***** OSOWIK, J. I. Introduction {¶ 1} Appellant, Juan Valiente-Mendoza, appeals the judgment of the Wood County Court of Common Pleas, sentencing him to 14 years in prison following a jury trial in which he was found guilty of one count each of possession of heroin, trafficking in heroin, possession of drugs, and trafficking in drugs. Finding no error, we affirm. A. Facts and Procedural Background {¶ 2} On the morning of September 1, 2016, Ohio State Highway Patrol Trooper Ryan Stewart and Border Patrol Agent Matthew Siefert were parked in a crossover along the Ohio Turnpike in Wood County when they observed a white Chevrolet Suburban SUV traveling eastbound. The vehicle was being driven by appellant, who appeared to the officers to be unusually rigid in posture. {¶ 3} Suspecting that something may be afoot with respect to appellant, Stewart decided to pull out of the crossover and observe appellant. As the officers approached the Suburban, they noticed that appellant had switched from the left lane to the right lane of travel, and was operating the vehicle with his hazard lights flashing. Stewart drew near to the vehicle in an effort to ascertain the license plate number and run the vehicle’s registration. The officers noticed that the license plates were from California. As Stewart was looking at the license plate in order to take down the number, appellant abruptly pulled his vehicle onto the shoulder and stopped. The officers slowed down and pulled onto the shoulder about three-quarters of a mile ahead of appellant and began to observe the Suburban. Appellant had already pulled off of the shoulder and back onto the highway by the time Stewart stopped his marked cruiser. In Stewart’s estimation, it appeared as though appellant’s behavior was evasive. Consequently, the officers decided to continue to monitor appellant. {¶ 4} After pulling back onto the highway, appellant proceeded to the next exit, which was located between where he originally stopped and where the officers had pulled 2. onto the shoulder. Stewart then waited for traffic to clear and proceeded onto a crossover and eventually onto the exit ramp. As the officers approached the tollgate, they noticed that the Suburban’s hazard lights were still activated. The officers also noticed that there was a female passenger, Ms. Alvarado-Franco, in the back seat, later identified as the owner of the Suburban. Steward proceeded to a tollgate lane adjacent to the one selected by appellant, where he was able to obtain a license plate number. While the registration was being ascertained, the officers noticed a stroller in the back of the vehicle, which ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals