LISBON, Ohio - A Columbiana County Common Pleas Court judge has ruled that prosecutors may present key evidence obtained from cell phones and a pickup truck in the upcoming trial of the man accused of murdering a Leetonia teacher.

Judge Megan Bickerton issued a judgment entry denying three separate motions filed by the defense to suppress evidence in the William Long case. The defense had argued that search warrants for the items were issued without sufficient probable cause, but the court found that investigators had ample reason to seize and search the property during their investigation into the death of Michelle Long.

William Long is accused of shooting his former wife, Michelle Long, a teacher at Leetonia High School, in November 2023. Her body was found in her vehicle near her home in Butler Township.

The ruling addresses challenges to three specific search warrants executed by the Columbiana County Sheriff’s Office. These warrants granted investigators access to Verizon Wireless records associated with a third party, the contents of William Long’s personal cell phone, and a 2005 Chevrolet pickup truck owned by the defendant.

In her decision regarding the defendant's own cell phone, Judge Bickerton detailed the timeline established by investigators immediately following the crime. According to the affidavit filed by Detective Lt. Caleb Wycoff, the Sheriff’s Office received a 911 call at approximately 9:28 p.m. on Nov. 29, 2023, reporting a shooting on Carey Road.

When deputies arrived, they found Michelle Long’s body in the driver’s seat of her truck. Investigators noted that William Long arrived at the scene shortly after the incident, driving a newer model 2019 Chevrolet pickup. During interactions with law enforcement at the scene, Long stated that he and the victim were divorced and that he had sent her a text message at 5 p.m. that day, which went unanswered.

The affidavit revealed that investigators later spoke with Michelle Long’s divorce attorney. The attorney told police that Michelle had visited his office on the afternoon of the murder and explicitly expressed concern for her safety regarding her ex-husband’s behavior. The judge ruled that these combined factors—the recent divorce, the defendant’s presence at the scene, and the victim’s documented fear—provided a substantial basis for the judge to believe evidence would be found on Long's phone.

The defense also attempted to block evidence gathered from a 2005 Chevrolet pickup truck, a vehicle different from the one Long drove to the crime scene. Investigators sought this warrant after reviewing security camera footage from the victim's residence. The detective noted that a vehicle seen in the footage was consistent with a dark-colored truck.

Additionally, the decision cites a witness interview with a man named Richard Todd. Todd told investigators he saw Long’s older 2005 truck at the base of a driveway on the day of the murder. When Todd asked about it, Long reportedly said he had taken the truck out for a drive because it had been sitting idle for too long. The judge found that the security video, coupled with the witness statement, established probable cause to search the older vehicle.

The third warrant in question targeted Verizon Wireless records for a cell phone number belonging to a woman named Leann Beadnell. The defense argued this search was improper, but the judge dismissed the challenge on procedural grounds.

Citing Ohio legal precedent, the court noted that constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure are personal rights. Because the phone did not belong to William Long, the judge ruled he had no legal standing to challenge the search. Essentially, a defendant cannot claim their rights were violated by a search directed at someone else.

In her closing analysis for each warrant, Judge Bickerton emphasized that the role of a judge issuing a warrant is to make a practical, common-sense decision based on the "four corners" of the affidavit. The law requires a fair probability that evidence of a crime will be found, not absolute certainty.

The denial of the motions clears the way for prosecutors to introduce the texts, location data, and physical evidence obtained through the warrants when the case goes to trial on Feb. 3.

 

 

 

William Long
William Long