On Point: C. Warrant unnecessary

William T. Case v. Montana, USSC No. 24-624, certiorari granted 6/2/25

SCOTUS added to its docket when it accepted an increasingly rare grant from state criminal proceedings in this Fourth Amendment case:

Question presented:

Whether law enforcement may enter a home without a search warrant based on less than probable cause that an emergency is occurring, or whether the emergency-aid exception requires probable cause.

State v. Peter J. Long, 2024AP1249-CR, 5/28/25, District II (not recommended for publication); case activity

While Long’s appeal presents some superficially interesting legal issues, ultimately COA’s dereference to the circuit court’s underlying factual findings govern the outcome here.

State v. Justin Dennis Krizan, 2022AP1341-CR, 3/4/25, District III  (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication), case activity

Applying its recent holding in State v. Gore, 2025 WI App 11, ___ Wis. 2d ___, ___ N.W.3d ___ (see our post on Gore here), the COA concludes that Krizan’s consent to a blood draw was voluntary because he was not misinformed about the consequences of refusing to consent.

State v. Ryan D. Wilkie, 2022AP730-CR, 3/11/25, District III (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

COA rejects Wilkie’s interesting constitutional arguments regarding the authority of law enforcement to enter his home without a warrant and affirms his conviction for obstructing an officer.

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.

State v. Lavelle Edgar Young, 2024AP470, 12/26/24, District I (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s order denying Lavelle Young’s motion to suppress physical evidence and his statements when an officer knocked on the window of his vehicle after observing Young sleeping in the driver’s seat of the vehicle.  The Court held that Young was not seized and was not in custody when he was questioned by police.

State v. Kahreem Rashah Wilkins, Sr., 2023AP1385-CR, 10/8/24, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity

In a 2-1 decision, the Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court’s order granting Kahreem Wilkins’ motion to suppress evidence seized from his vehicle.  The majority found that Wilkins was not seized when police approached the vehicle and saw a firearm in plain view, while the dissent concluded a reasonable person surrounded in his vehicle by four officers would not feel free to leave.

State v. Reichert, 2023AP1224, 8/14/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

Roxanne Reichert appealed from a judgment of conviction after she pled no contest to operating a vehicle under the influence.  She argued that the circuit court erred when it denied her motion to suppress evidence seized after she was stopped in her vehicle.  The Court of Appeals affirmed and found that: 1) police were justified to stop Reichert as a community caretaking function; and 2) police had reasonable suspicion to extend the stop to investigate Reichert for criminal activity, including OWI.

State v. Michael Gene Wiskowski, 2024 WI 23, 6/18/24, reversing and remanding an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)

Community caretaking does not allow police to continue seizure after officer resolves purpose for stop unless reasonable suspicion or probable cause developed.  Three justices question continuing validity of Wisconsin’s community caretaking precedent in light of SCOTUS’s decision in Caniglia v. Strom.

State v. Joshua L. Thering, 2023AP1253, 1/23/24, District 4 (1-judge decision, not eligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)

While the court of appeals agrees the facts in Thering’s case are “similar in significant respects” to the SCOW-approved police encounter in County of Grant v. Vogt, 2014 WI 76, 356 Wis. 2d 343, 850 N.W.2d 253, the court concludes that the totality of the circumstances in Thering’s case “involved a meaningfully greater show of authority by police than in Vogt,” which was characterized as a “close case.” Therefore, the court reverses the circuit court’s order denying Thering’s motion to suppress and his judgment of conviction for OWI 2nd.