Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-50diff_d18f.pdf
Page Number: 5.0

2 

CHIAVERINI v. CITY OF NAPOLEON 

Opinion of the Court 

sale, and asked Chiaverini to return their property.  Chia-
verini said no, so the owners contacted the police.  Two of-
ficers,  on  a  later  visit  to  the  store,  directed  Chiaverini  to 
surrender  the  ring  to  its  owners.    But  Chiaverini  refused 
their request too, saying that it contradicted a letter he had 
just received from the police department telling him to re-
tain the ring as evidence.  And when repeating his refusal
to  another  officer  the  next  day,  Chiaverini  suggested  (for 
reasons unclear) that he was operating his store without a 
license.  The result of that (shall we say, unprofitable) ex-
change was that the police turned their attention from the
original theft to Chiaverini’s business.

Soon afterward, the officers launched a criminal proceed-
ing against Chiaverini in municipal court.  They filed three
complaints,  each  charging  him  with  a  separate  offense. 
Two  were  misdemeanors:  receiving  stolen  property  and 
dealing in precious metals without a license.  The third was 
a felony: money laundering.  To support their accompany-
ing application for an arrest warrant, the officers submitted 
an affidavit making the case for probable cause on all three 
charges, but focusing on the felony.  See App. 16–17.  For 
that charge to succeed, Chiaverini must have known when 
he  bought  the  ring  that  the  transaction  involved  the  pro-
ceeds  of  unlawful  activity.    See  Ohio  Rev.  Code  Ann. 
§1315.55(a)(1) (Lexis 2016).  In support of that element, the 
officers averred that Chiaverini always suspected the ring
was stolen.  The judge issued the requested warrant, and 
the  officers  arrested  Chiaverini.    He  remained  in  custody
for three days, until his arraignment.  At a later prelimi-
nary hearing, the judge heard testimony about the evidence
supporting  the  officers’  probable-cause  allegations.    See 
App. to Pet. for Cert. 6a–7a.  The officers maintained that 
Chiaverini  had  admitted  in  their  interview  to  suspecting
the  ring  was  stolen;  Chiaverini  denied  making  any  such 
statement.  At  the  hearing’s  conclusion,  the  judge  again 
found probable cause, and set the three charges for trial.