On Point blog, page 2 of 2
Exigency — Automobile Exception to Warrant Requirement — Probable Cause, Based on Anonymous Tip
State v. Tabitha A. Sherry, 2004 WI App 207, PFR filed 11/19/04
For Sherry: Craig R. Day
Issue/Holding:
¶15. Sherry next argues that, regardless whether the officer legally stopped her car, the subsequent warrantless non-consent search of her car was illegal. An automobile may be searched without a warrant if there is probable cause to search the vehicle and the vehicle is readily mobile.
Exigency — Automobile Exception to Warrant Requirement — Probable Cause Required
State v. Timothy T. Clark, 2003 WI App 121
For Clark: Rodney Cubbie
Issue/Holding: Although warrantless automobile searches aren’t presumptively unreasonable, the automobile exception to the warrant requirement is inapplicable in the absence of probable cause to search the automobile. ¶18.
Exigency – Automobile Exception to Warrant Requirement – Probable Cause, Dog Sniff
State v. Tina M. Miller, 2002 WI App 150, PFR filed 6/3/03
For Miller: Timothy A. Provis
Issue/Holding: Based on evidence that the dog had been trained in drug detection, the police had probable cause to search the automobile once the dog alerted them, including probable cause to search a purse within the car. ¶¶12-15
But, keep in mind this potentially important limitation,
Exigency — Automobile Exception to Warrant Requirement
State v. Robert J. Pallone, 2000 WI 77, 236 Wis. 2d 162, 613 N.W.2d 568, affirming State v. Pallone, 228 Wis. 2d 272, 596 N.W.2d 882
For Pallone: Steven J. Watson
Issue: Whether the search of a vehicle passenger’s duffel bag, following the driver’s arrest for the forfeiture offense of having open intoxicants, was proper.
Holding: The search was justified as both incident to arrest and as based on probable cause.
Exigency — Automobile Exception to Warrant Requirement — Probable Cause: White Powder
State v. Timothy R. Stankus, 220 Wis. 2d 232, 582 N.W.2d 468 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Stankus: Steven J. Watson
Issue/Holding: Though the officer had never touched cocaine before, his discovery of a white, flour-like susbtance in clear plastic bags under the seat supported probable cause. And, because he therefore had probable cause to believe the vehicle contained evidence of a crime, he was entitled to search every part of it,