On Point blog, page 1 of 36
COA: Community caretaking function does not justify seizing a witness to a traffic accident.
State v. William A. Anderson, 2025AP796, 4/29/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA reversed the circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress because law enforcement’s community caretaker function did not justify seizing a possible witness to a motorcycle accident.
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 .
COA holds officers had reasonable suspicion to justify Act 79 search of vehicle
State v. Shawn Clarke Spottswood, 2023AP1763-CR, 4/28/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Spottswood appeals the circuit court’s denial of his suppression motion after having entered a plea to receiving or concealing stolen property. On appeal, he again challenges the warrantless search of his vehicle, contending that law enforcement lacked reasonable suspicion that he had committed, was committing, or was about to commit an offense sufficient to justify the search under 2013 Wis. Act 79 and WIS. STAT. § 973.09(1d).
COA upholds Act 79 vehicle search where officer seized suspect while performing community caretaking function and subsequently developed reasonable suspicion of drug use
State of Wisconsin v. Brandon L. Strickland, 2024AP2376-CR, 3/17/26, District III (not recommended for publication); case activity
The COA determined that law enforcement’s community caretaking function justified an officer to direct a person out of his vehicle after the officer found the person asleep at the wheel while the car was parked in his driveway. And because the officer developed reasonable suspicion that the suspect used and possessed a controlled substance and was on probation, the officer lawfully searched the vehicle under Act 79.
COA rejects facial challenge to Implied Consent Law; affirms denial of motion to suppress blood results
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.
Defense win: COA suppresses evidence from warrantless blood draw, vacates OWI conviction
State v. Brandon J. Taff, 2024AP373, 2/17/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
COA reverses Taff’s conviction on the basis that his warrantless blood draw was not justified by exigent circumstances, and therefore should have been suppressed.
SCOTUS applies emergency aid exception to warrant requirement “without further gloss;” declines to adopt probable cause standard
Case v. Montana, USSC No. 24-624, 1/14/2026, affirming Montana v. Case, 2024 MT 165, 417 Mont. 354, 553 P.3d 985; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS unanimously holds that Brigham City v. Stuart‘s objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render aid applies “without further gloss” and was satisfied here. While SCOTUS affirms the Montana Supreme Court’s judgment, the Court does not adopt the lower court’s reasoning in full.
In eagerly-awaited decision, SCOW holds that police did not exceed scope of previously conducted “private search” of suspected CSAM
State v, Michael Joseph Gasper, 2026 WI 3, 1/14/26, affirming a published decision of the court of appeals (on other grounds); case activity
In a narrow decision, SCOW holds that law enforcement did not exceed the scope of a private search conducted on a file uploaded by Gasper to Snapchat account which allegedly contained CSAM and affirms.
COA: Police reasonably conveyed implied consent warnings to suspected drunk driver although officer commented to driver that not all of the warnings applied.
State v. Sam M. Shareef, 2025AP661, 12/10/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA holds that police reasonably conveyed implied consent warnings to a suspected drunk driver although the officer told the driver that some of the circumstances described on the Informing the Accused form did not apply to him.
COA issues first impression decision on constitutionality of warrant to search contents of smartphone, holds “the warrant must specify the particular items of evidence to be searched for and seized from the [smart]phone,” and its authorization must be “limited to the time period and information or other data for which probable cause has been properly established… in the warrant’s supporting affidavit”
State v. Emil L. Melssen, 2024AP1942-CR, 11/20/25, District IV (recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Emil Melssen appeals from a judgment of conviction following a jury trial, in which he was convicted of possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver and related charges. He argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction and the circuit court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained in the execution of two search warrants. COA rejects Melssen’s sufficiency argument, but concludes that the warrant to search his smartphone violated the Fourth Amendment because it was overbroad and not carefully tailored to its justifications. The court remands for a determination on the remedy.