The ĐÓ°ÉĘÓƵ School of Law Appellate Litigation Clinic took center stage on Oct. 27 during a special session of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, held at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. Third-year student Damien Chafin went to bat for his client before Judges Chad Readler, Eric Murphy and Rachel Bloomekatz, showcasing the depth of real-world preparation, collaboration and mentorship that define the Milton and Charlotte Kramer Law Clinic. Chafin’s argument was the very first of the morning.
The case is on the cutting edge of Fourth Amendment law. A Tennessee police officer searched the client’s vehicle without a warrant, based solely on the alert of a drug-sniffing dog.
The problem: The dog hadn’t been trained to tell the difference between marijuana and hemp—which is now a legal substance.
So the question before the Sixth Circuit was whether a canine that is trained to alert to multiple illegal drugs can still supply probable cause for a warrantless vehicle search in states that, like Tennessee, have legalized cannabis in hemp form.
“The government's position was that the dog alert alone provided probable cause,” said Chafin. “We argued that K-9s are unique in a Fourth Amendment context if they detect contraband and nothing else. The crux of our argument hinged on what the Supreme Court has long said—that drug-sniffing dogs are an exception in the Fourth Amendment context because they detect only illegal substances—something that is no longer true.”
The case also raises an intricate procedural question involving the court’s reliance on a magistrate’s report and recommendation without considering the client’s objections. Chafin also argued that the admission of a vague text message about some nonspecific “gun” unfairly prejudiced the client in contravention of the rules of evidence.
Chafin’s performance in court reflected not only his skill and dedication, but also the collaborative spirit of the clinic. Katherine Clawson (LAW ’25) wrote the opening brief, setting the stage with meticulous research, clear arguments and powerful writing. Professor Melissa Ghrist, who teaches appellate practice to second-year students, wrote the reply brief. Students and other faculty contributed to research, practice rounds and strategic planning leading up to the argument. The client entrusted Clawson and Chafin with his case, which was crucial to the process.
“Our students do the real work of lawyers—writing briefs, preparing strategy and responding to challenging questions,” explained Professor Andrew Pollis, director of the Appellate Litigation Clinic. “Our students, with our guidance, help each other grow as advocates and as people, while advancing the interests of real people in real cases—some of whom are currently behind bars without having had a fair trial. The students’ dedication and teamwork—to and with each other and to and with their clients—are what bring these cases to life.”
The Kramer Law Clinic offers ĐÓ°ÉĘÓƵ law students opportunities to serve clients in both federal and state courts and across a wide spectrum of legal areas. Each clinic—whether focused on appeals, transactions, trial representation, or other advocacy—fosters teamwork, professional growth and client-centered practice. Students work closely with faculty mentors and peers, building confidence and skills through direct experience.
“It was a tremendous learning experience to participate in the oral argument,” said Chafin. “One of my goals going into the clinic was to argue a real case, and accomplishing that in federal court is a tremendous boost for my career as someone who intends to practice in the federal appellate courts.”
Listen to .
