On Point blog, page 3 of 34
COA finds consent to blood draw valid in a detailed discussion of Wisconsin’s implied consent statutes recommended for publication.
State v. Christopher A. Gore, 2023AP169-CR, 1/7/25, District III (recommended for publication), case activity
The Court of Appeals held, in a decision recommended for publication, that Christopher Gore’s consent to a blood draw was voluntary because he was not misinformed about the consequences of refusing to consent, and the officer’s statement that he would seek to obtain a warrant if Gore did not consent did not invalidate his consent.
COA: Driver misinformed he would be charged with first-offense OWI did not have right to refuse breath test; Ignition Interlock statute does not violate Dormant Commerce Clause when applied to out-of-state resident.
State v. Sharpe, 2021AP1543 & 2022AP307, 9/24/24, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity here and here
COA determines defendant arrested for OWI did not meet burden to show that he was unable to make knowing and intelligent choice about submitting to breath test when officers misinformed him that he would be charged with a first-offense OWI. COA rejects facial and as-applied challenge to IID statute based on Dormant Commerce Clause.
COA rejects challenges to refusal finding; holds that refusal statute is not unconstitutional
State v. Albert A. Terhune, 2023AP353, 9/19/24, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
In a somewhat complicated OWI appeal, COA ultimately affirms under well-settled legal standards.
COA affirms circuit court’s decision to exclude evidence at refusal hearing; although officer’s statements to defendant during traffic stop were relevant, they were inadmissible when offered through another officer without personal knowledge of statements.
State v. Rodriguez, 2024AP481, 8/14/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
COA affirms circuit court’s decision to exclude relevant, but inadmissible, evidence at refusal hearing because witness lacked personal knowledge.
COA: Evidence of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of controlled substances sufficient due to reasonable inference
State v. Joseph B. Venable, 2023AP1367, 8/15/24, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
COA affirms circuit court judgment convicting Venable of first offense operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of controlled substances under Wis. Stat. § 346.63(1)(a), due to his use of prescription medications.
COA: Driver does not have right under implied consent statute to refuse blood test when driver proposes to take breath or urine test.
City of Mequon v. Schumacher, 2023AP2411, 7/3/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
COA determines person suspected of driving under the influence does not have right under implied consent statute, Wis. Stat. § 343.305, to refuse blood test if the person offers to take a breath or urine test instead.
COA affirms refusal based on delayed and equivocal consent
Village of Butler v. Brandon J. Hernandez, 2023AP1707, 6/19/24, District II (one-judge appeal; ineligible for publication); case activity
Hernandez challenges the circuit court’s finding that he improperly refused to submit to a OWI blood draw, arguing that he consented. The court of appeals rejects his argument, concluding that the circuit court’s finding was not clearly erroneous.
Speeding motorist’s attempt to undo conviction in COA fails under governing standard of review
Winnebago County v. Thomas J. Roberts, 2023AP1808, District II, 6/12/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a rare appeal of a conviction for speeding, COA easily dispatches Roberts’s arguments given the deferential standard of review for findings of fact.
Police properly requested PBT; had probable cause to arrest intoxicated motorist
State v. Joseph S. Schenian, 2023AP2017-CR, 6/5/24, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
Despite Schenian’s best efforts to do away with a damaging PBT result, COA rejects his arguments and affirms.
COA finds intoxicated driver was not subjected to “constructive arrest” and affirms denial of motion to suppress
City of Hartford v. Edward H. White, 2023AP1813 & 2023AP1814, 6/5/24, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
Although White tries to argue that he was under an unconstitutional constructive arrest when initially seized for suspicion of an OWI offense, COA finds his arguments unavailing and affirms.