On Point blog, page 173 of 263
Pat-down search was lawful because police had probable cause to arrest
State v. Steven L. Kaulfuerst, 2014AP1428-CR, District 2, 12/10/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The pat-down search of Kaulfuerst was lawful because police had probable cause to arrest him for disorderly conduct, even though police had not arrested him for that offense.
Tip that driver was drunk and had his children in the car supported community caretaker stop
State v. David C. Marker, 2014AP1122-CR, District 2, 12/10/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The stop of the vehicle Marker was driving was justified under the community caretaker exception because, based on a call from Marker’s ex-wife, police had reason to believe Marker was driving while intoxicated with his children in the vehicle.
Cases dismissed after completion of deferred prosecution agreement can’t be expunged under § 973.015
State v. Andrew R. Geurts, 2014AP1520-CR, District 4, 12/4/14 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court had no authority to expunge the record of Geurts’s criminal case after it was dismissed after his successful completion of a deferred prosecution agreement because § 973.015 applies only to the record of an offense for which the person has been found guilty.
Jury instruction defining “drug” using dictionary was proper in ch. 51 commitment based on drug dependency
Marathon County v. Zachary W., 2014AP955, District 3, 12/2/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Even if the circuit court erred it provided multiple definitions of the term “drug” when instructing the jury hearing a ch. 51 commitment case.
Evidence found sufficient to support termination of parental rights
State v. Faizel K., 2014AP2035 & 2014AP2036, District 1, 12/2/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity: 2014AP2035; 2014AP2036
In this fact-intensive decision, the court of appeals holds there was sufficient evidence to support the orders terminating Faizel’s parental rights to his sons Mohammed K. and Robeul K.
Odor of raw marijuana didn’t justify search of driver’s wallet
State v. Ashley L. Eirich, 2014AP1901-CR, District 2, 11/26/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Saying that “[t]raining and experience do not turn police officers into drug-detection canines,” the court of appeals holds that probable cause to search a vehicle based on the odor of raw marijuana did not extend to a search of the bill compartment of the driver’s wallet.
A child is “adjudged” CHIPS for purposes of § 48.415(10) when CHIPS grounds are found
Dane County DHS v. Christina L., 2014AP1437, District 4, 11/20/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
There was a factual basis for Christina L.’s no contest plea to grounds for termination under § 48.415(10) because the child in this case, Aiden G-L., was “adjudged” CHIPS within three years of the involuntary termination of her parental rights to another child, Shaun L.
Witness reports and officers’ observations provided probable cause to arrest for OWI
City of Portage v. Kenneth D. Cogdill, 2014AP1492, District 4, 11/20/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Police had probable cause to believe Cogdill had been operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant based on the statements of witnesses, the officers’ own observations, and Cogdill’s statements.
Plea withdrawal denied despite allegation trial counsel gave erroneous advice
State v. Stephanie M. Przytarski, 2014AP1019-CR, District 1, 11/18/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Przytarski can’t withdraw her plea even if her trial lawyer erroneously told her that she could appeal the trial court’s pretrial order that barred her from introducing certain evidence to defend against charges of interference with child custody.
Certification as to authenticity of cell phone records was inadequate under § 909.02(12)
Nicole Marie Thomas v. Korry Ardell, 2014AP295, District 4, 11/13/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
The circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in refusing to admit cell phone records because the proponent of the evidence didn’t provide a proper foundation by presenting either the testimony of a qualified witness or a proper certification proving authenticity.