On Point: B. Chs. 343-346: Traffic offense

State v. Richard A. Tourtillot, 2024AP1831, 7/7/26, District III (not recommended for publication); case activity

The COA determined the defendant’s consent to a blood draw was voluntary under a since-repealed portion of the Implied Consent Law.

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.

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.

State v. Aman D. Singh, 2025AP424, 6/16/26, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity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.

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.

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.

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 .

State v. Conor Alexander Noble, 2025AP811-CR, 3/11/26, District II (1 judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity

COA rejects Noble’s facial unconstitutionality challenge to Wisconsin’s Implied Consent Law (ICL) and affirms the circuit court’s denial of Noble’s motion to suppress the blood draw results for lack of voluntary consent.

State v. Jacobe Michael Gimmel, 2025AP1037 & 2025AP1537, 1/29/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

Gimmel appeals his conviction for OWI 2nd and the revocation of his driver’s license for refusing a chemical test. The sole issue in the consolidated appeal is whether the officer who stopped Gimmel had reasonable suspicion to do so. COA affirms, concluding the officer had reasonable suspicion that Gimmel had violated a local noise ordinance.

State v. Jeffrey Lee Buss, 2025AP392, 1/23/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

Although Buss makes some interesting arguments as to why he did not “refuse” the requested breath test, COA is unpersuaded and affirms.