On Point: 46. WI Court of Appeals

State v. Glover B. Jones, 2002 WI App 196, PFR filed 8/22/02
For Jones: Mark D. Richards

Issue/Holding:

¶13. There are no longer specific prerequisites to a finding of confidential informant reliability. Rather, the current test simply requires courts to “consider all of the circumstances set forth in the affidavit, including the veracity and basis of knowledge of persons supplying hearsay information.” 

State v. Glover B. Jones, 2002 WI App 196, PFR filed 8/22/02
For Jones: Mark D. Richards

Issue/Holding: Although the age of the information in the warrant application – six months – gives pause, it isn’t sufficiently stale to defeat probable cause for drug trafficking.

¶22                        Jones argues that the key information in the warrant affidavit—the informant’s allegations—was over six months old.  

State v. Garry C. Eskridge, 2002 WI App 158, PFR filed 6/14/02
For Eskridge: Gregory Bates

Issue: Whether a tenant had an expectation of privacy in the basement area of a multiple unit apartment building.

Holding: A tenant’s expectation of privacy in the common areas of multiple unit buildings is decided on a case by case basis. ¶10. Because the state offered credible testimony —

State v. Kirk J. Bergquist, 2002 WI App 39
For Berhquist: Steven H. Gibbs

Issue: Whether the state’s refusal to return guns valued at between $5000 and $7,150, following conviction for disorderly conduct, violated the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause.

Holding:

¶8. Although the term ‘forfeiture’ does not appear in this statute, our supreme court has recognized that the result of refusing to return a weapon to a person who committed a crime using the weapon is a forfeiture.

State v. Vernell T. Williams, 2002 WI App 306
For Williams: Michael A. Haakenson
Issue: Whether a stop whose purpose (to investigate possible connection to an earlier crime) had dissipated was unlawfully prolonged by a checking the driver’s license.

Holding:

¶19. In State v. Ellenbecker, 159 Wis. 2d 91, 464 N.W.2d 427 (Ct. App. 1990), we held that a request for a driver’s license from a driver whose vehicle was disabled,

State v. Vernell T. Williams, 2002 WI App 306
For Williams: Michael A. Haakenson
Issue/Holding:

¶24. It is true that when an officer has fulfilled the purpose of a lawful stop, the officer’s request for permission to search the vehicle does not, in itself, transform the stop into an unlawful one. State v. Gaulrapp, 207 Wis. 2d 600, 558 N.W.2d 696 (Ct.

State v. Vernell T. Williams, 2002 WI App 306
For Williams: Michael A. Haakenson

Issue: Whether reasonable suspicion supported the stop of defendant’s car four days after a reported domestic abuse incident, because the car generally matched the description of the suspect’s car.

Holding:

¶14. We conclude that Officer Garcia did have knowledge of facts sufficient to provide a reasonable suspicion that the driver of the vehicle had been involved in the domestic abuse incident.

State v. Jeffrey Stout, 2002 WI App 41, PFR filed 2/21/02
For Stout: James L. Fullin, Jr., SPD, Madison Appellate

Issue: Whether Stout was seized when police entered the residence.

Holding:

¶21. … (W)e are left with the presence of three officers in the room and whether their presence, absent the display of a weapon, physical contact or use of language, was sufficient to establish a seizure.

State v. Thomas W. Grimm, 2002 WI App 242
For Grimm: Daniel W. Hildebrand

Issue/Holding: State v. Robins, 2002 WI 65, 253 Wis. 2d 298, 646 N.W.2d 287, and State v. Koenck, 2001 WI App 93, 242 Wis. 2d 693, 626 N.W.2d 359, which permit enticement charges where a fictitious online “victim” is thought by the defendant to be a child,

State v. Thomas W. Grimm, 2002 WI App 242
For Grimm: Daniel W. Hildebrand

Issue/Holding: The rationale of State v. Robins, 2002 WI 65, 253 Wis. 2d 298, 646 N.W.2d 287, and State v. Koenck, 2001 WI App 93, 242 Wis. 2d 693, 626 N.W.2d 359, which permit enticement charges where a fictitious online “victim” is thought by the defendant to be a child,