On Point blog, page 1 of 35
Defense Win: COA affirms circuit court order suppressing blood test
State of Wisconsin v. Jorge Luis Perez-Aldape, 2026AP642-CR, 7/29/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
In a unique OWI case, COA relies on SCOW guidance to uphold the circuit court’s order suppressing blood evidence due to a failure to read the person the Informing the Accused Form.
COA holds that consent to blood test was voluntary and rejects challenges to OWI conviction
County of Milwaukee v. Troy Michael Tordoer, 2024AP2492, 7/28/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
Although Tordoer claims that he was coerced into consenting to an evidentiary blood draw, COA agrees with the circuit court that Tordoer’s consent was voluntary.
COA finds reasonable suspicion to extend traffic stop to investigate for OWI and probable cause to arrest.
Village of Grafton v. Blake S. Barnes, 2026AP160, 7/15/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress the fruits of his stop and arrest for speeding and operating while intoxicated where the defendant drove 48 miles per hour on a road posted for 25 miles per hour at 12:30 a.m., the officer smelled alcohol in the vehicle, the defendant exhibited glassy eyes, admitted he drank alcohol that night, and failed field sobriety tests.
COA finds consent to blood test was voluntary under since-repealed provision of Implied Consent Statute
State v. Richard A. Tourtillot, 2024AP1831, 7/7/26, District III (not recommended for publication); case activity
The COA determined the defendant’s consent to a blood draw was voluntary under a since-repealed portion of the Implied Consent Law.
COA affirms suppression order because officer’s mistake of law did not provide reasonable suspicion for traffic stop.
State v. Michael P. Bundy, 2025AP1072, 6/25/26, District IV (not eligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order suppressing the fruits of a traffic stop because an officer’s mistake of law regarding the driver’s suspected violation of the window tinting regulation did not provide reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle.
Defense win: COA affirms order suppressing blood test evidence due to coercion
City of Antigo v. John Paul Fermanich, 2023AP1834, 6/16/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
The City of Antigo appeals an order granting John Paul Fermanich’s motion to suppress blood evidence because Fermanich’s consent to the blood draw was coerced. COA affirms in this “close case” as it is the city’s burden to demonstrate that Fermanich freely and voluntarily consented to the warrantless blood draw.
COA: Felony fleeing and resisting arrest are the “same act” for purposes of tolling statute of limitations.
State v. Aman D. Singh, 2025AP424, 6/16/26, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity
The COA held that felony fleeing and resisting arrest are the “same act” for purposes of tolling the statute of limitations.
COA: Driver suspected of operating under the influence not entitled to alternative test to measure intoxication until arrest.
Portage County v. Adam N. Dombrowski, 2025AP204, 5/21/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA held that a driver suspected of operating while intoxicated was not entitled to an alternative test to measure the driver’s blood, breath, or urine until he was arrested. The circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress the results of his blood test were therefore affirmed.
COA finds officer’s reference to an “automatic” revocation did not render consent to blood draw involuntary
City of Mequon v. Scott Sarver Lindvall, 2025AP1703, 5/13/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
Although Lindvall seizes on the officer’s word choice in discussing the consequences of refusing to consent to an evidentiary blood draw, the Court ultimately finds his arguments unavailing and affirms.
COA concludes consent to blood draw was free and voluntary despite defendant’s aversion to needles.
Winnebago County v. Michael Jon Potratz, 2025AP1059, 4/29/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress the results of his blood draw based on the factors established by SCOW in Artic .