On Point blog, page 362 of 485
Warrants – No-Knock: Unannounced Entry, not Authorized by Warrant but Permissible Where Target not Inside
State v. Thomas William Brady, 2007 WI App 33, PFR filed 2/13/07
For Brady: Suzanne L. Hagopian, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: Where the target of a search was not at home when the police forcibly entered pursuant to a search warrant, their unannounced entry did not, although not authorized by the warrant, violate the fourth amendment.
¶13 The first consideration is the safety of the police and others.
Search Warrant – Probable Cause – Online, Credit Card Purchase of Child Pornography
State v. Dennis M. Gralinski, 2007 WI App 233
For Gralinski: Martin Kohler; Craig Powell, PFR filed 10/5/07
Issue: Whether use of the defendant’s credit card number to purchase online membership to a child pornography site established probable cause for a search warrant of the defendant’s home.
Holding:
¶12 Gralinski argues that the special agent’s affidavit did not demonstrate probable cause for searching his home.
Warrants – Probable Cause – “Nexus” Between Objects Sought and Place to be Searched
State v. Christopher D. Sloan, 2007 WI App 146
For Sloan: Thomas E. Hayes
Issue/Holding: There was an insufficiently established “nexus” between the contraband found in a package and its return address to support a search warrant for that address:
¶31 What Hennen does not describe in his affidavit is critical to our analysis. He never tells the reader that he believes Sloan is,
Search Warrant – Staleness – Computerized Child Pornography Purchase 2+-Years Earlier
State v. Dennis M. Gralinski, 2007 WI App 233
For Gralinski: Martin Kohler; Craig Powell, PFR filed 10/5/07
Issue/Holding:
¶26 Gralinski next contends that the warrant was invalid because it was based on stale information such that no inference could be drawn that the items sought in the warrant would be located in his home two and one-half years after the membership to the Regpay website was purchased.
Public Trial – Locked Courthouse
State v. David L. Vanness, 2007 WI App 195
For Vanness: Chad Lanning
Issue/Holding: Right to public trial under the 6th amendment was violated when the courthouse was locked (though the courtroom doors themselves remained open) during the defense case and State’s rebuttal:
¶8 The right to a public trial is a basic tenet of our judicial system, Walton v. Briley, 361 F.3d 431,
Conspiracy – § 939.31, Elements – Generally
State v. Henry E. Routon, 2007 WI App 178, PFR filed 7/23/07
For Routon: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶18 Wisconsin Stat. § 939.31 sets forth the elements of the crime of conspiracy applicable under Wis. Stat. § 961.41(1x).[8] Section 939.31 provides:
…. whoever, with intent that a crime be committed, agrees or combines with another for the purpose of committing that crime may,
Conspiracy — § 939.31 – Sufficiency of Evidence – Agreement
State v. Henry E. Routon, 2007 WI App 178, PFR filed 7/23/07
For Routon: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶36 Routon, as noted above, argues that the single sale to Agent Smith is, as a matter of law, insufficient evidence of an agreement. However, in the cases on which he relies, there was no evidence, as there is here,
Forfeiture – Dismissal with Prejudice, Failure to Hold Timely Hearing on Petition, § 961.555(2)
State v. Lamont D. Powell, 2007 WI App 127
For Powell: Nicholas C. Zales
Issue/Holding:
¶3 The sixty-day limit in Wis. Stat. § 961.555(2)(b) is mandatory and a forfeiture petition must be dismissed unless the requisite hearing is held within the sixty-day period because a person may not be deprived of his or her property “for an indefinite time” without a prompt judicial assessment of whether forfeiture is justified.
Reasonable Suspicion – Basis – Unusual Nervousness and Behavior, as Ground to Extend Routine Traffic Stop
State v. Philip R. Bons, 2007 WI App 124, PFR filed 4/24/07
For Bons: Vladimir M. Gorokhovsky
Issue: Whether a concededly proper traffic stop (for speeding) was extended without sufficient cause when the officer, after issuing the ticket and returning the license, asked to search the car.
Holding:
¶15 We conclude that Ramstack could have formed a reasonable suspicion that Bons was engaged in illegal activity,
Reasonable Suspicion – Basis – Traffic Stop – Vehicle’s Owner Known to Have Revoked License
State v. Frank C. Newer, 2007 WI App 236, PFR filed 11/8/07; prior history: Certification, 8/8/07, denied, 9/10/07
For Newer: Francis R. Lettenberger
Issue/Holding: The police have reasonable suspicion to stop a vehicle whose owner’s DL is known to have been revoked, given no reason to think someone other than the owner is behind the wheel:
¶2 We now reverse the circuit court’s suppression of the evidence and remand for further proceedings.