On Point blog, page 1 of 5
COA: Sufficient evidence to request blood draw independent from defendant’s compelled statements; defendant’s IAC claims were conclusory and undeveloped.
State v. Nicholas J. Nero, 2023AP543, District III, 6/10/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA found that law enforcement had probable cause that Nicholas Nero was driving under the influence, independent from his compelled statement to his probation officer and un-Mirandized statement to a deputy sheriff, and therefore affirmed the circuit court’s order denying his motion to suppress the results of his blood draw. The COA also found that Nero’s claims for ineffective assistance of counsel at trial were conclusory and undeveloped.
COA: Inevitable discovery via inventory search applies even if search occurred before decision to tow.
State v. Carter Nelson, 2024AP617-CR, 11/6/24, District II (one judge decision; not eligible for publication); case activity
The Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court’s order granting Carter Nelson’s motion to suppress cocaine seized from his vehicle without a warrant and without probable cause. The Court held that the evidence would have inevitably been discovered in a standard inventory search when Nelson’s vehicle was towed.
Search of socks and shoes for weapon was fine; so was subsequent search of car
State v. James Timothy Genous, 2019AP435-CR, 11/1/22, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
In 2020 the court of appeals held that police didn’t have reasonable suspicion to stop Genous to investigate whether he was selling drugs. The supreme court reversed and sent the case back to the court of appeals to address the lawfulness of the searches of Genous’s shoes and socks and his car. Over a dissent, the court of appeals holds they were.
SCOW: Subpoena for hospital records of defendant’s blood tests wasn’t tainted by prior unlawful warrantless blood draw
State v. Daniel J. Van Linn, 2022 WI 16, 3/24/22, affirming an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)
After Van Linn refused to consent to a blood draw, police ordered one to be taken even though they didn’t have a warrant or exigent circumstances. After the circuit court suppressed the results of the test of this illegal blood draw, the state obtained the same evidence using a subpoena for Van Linn’s medical records. The supreme court holds that, under the “indepedent source” doctrine, the evidence obtained with the subpoena should not be suppressed even though the state sought the subpoena after the suppression of the same evidence obtained with the illegal blood draw.
Defense win – COA holds police exceeded scope of consent to search computer
State v. Kevin M. Jereczek, 2021 WI App 30; case activity (including briefs)
Police suspected Jereczek’s son in a sexual assault and thought there might be evidence on the family desktop computer. They asked Jereczek if they could search the machine; he agreed but limited his permission to the son’s account. The examiner, Behling, didn’t adhere to this restriction: he instead began his search in the recycle bin, which contains files deleted from any of the computer’s accounts. There he found child pornography apparently associated with Jereczek’s account, which led him to seek a warrant to search the entire computer. Execution of this warrant turned up more images, leading to the charges against Jereczek. Jereczek moved to suppress the images, saying the initial search had exceeded the scope of his consent. The circuit court denied suppression; Jereczek pleaded no contest to one count and appealed.
Court of Appeals certifies important cell phone search issues
State v. George Steven Burch, 2019AP404-CR, District 3 (10/20/20), review granted 11/18/20, circuit court judgment affirmed, 2021 WI 68; case activity (including briefs)
Burch … contends the [Green Bay Police Department] and the [Brown County Sheriff’s Office] violated his Fourth Amendment rights in three ways: (1) the GBPD exceeded the scope of his consent to search his cell phone by downloading the phone’s entire contents, rather than only the text messages; (2) the GBPD unlawfully retained the entire cell phone download after it completed its June 2016 investigation into the vehicle incidents; and (3) the BCSO had no lawful authority to conduct a second search of the cell phone download in August 2016. Because these issues raise novel questions regarding the application of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence to the vast array of digital information contained in modern cell phones, we certify this appeal to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Defense win! COA affirms suppression due to State’s failure to refute the basis for the circuit court’s ruling
State v. Catherine Cuskey Large, 2019AP1966-CR, 8/13/20, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication; case activity (including briefs)
The court of appeals correctly affirmed the circuit court’s decision to suppress OWI evidence in this case, where an officer admitted that the New Glarus Police Department’s “protocol” was to administer PBTs on motorists whether they had probable cause for OWI or not. But court of appeals did so by taking a heavy-handed approach to waiver, a rule of administration that appellate courts have the discretion to apply or not.
COA: Consent to search apartment voluntary and attenuated from dog sniff
State v. Anthony S. Taylor, 2017AP587-CR, 12/21/17, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Police responded to a 911 call from S.M., Taylor’s girlfriend. She had been in a fight with another woman in the apartment building they all lived in. The other woman told the cops that she had gone with Taylor to pick up marijuana that day, that he was storing it in the apartment he shared with S.M., and that he may also have had a firearm. An officer testified he also knew Taylor had recently been the victim of a robbery and was a felon.
Defense win on Miranda and consent to search
State v. Omar Quinton Triggs, 2015AP2533, 6/13/17, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A patrolling officer saw Triggs “close a garage door and quickly run to the driver’s door” and get into his car, which was parked nearby in an alley. Five officers in three vehicles converged, forcibly removed Triggs from his car, and handcuffed him.
Court of appeals: warranted search attenuated from alleged illegal entry
State v. Andrew S. Sato, 2015AP1815-CR, 10/18/2016, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Police investigating an armed robbery the previous evening learned their suspect was at home in his apartment. One officer initiated a “knock and talk,” banging on the front door of the apartment and yelling for five to ten minutes while another officer positioned himself outside near the apartment’s bedroom window. After that second officer heard loud noises, the first kicked in the door and arrested Sato. The officers then went and got a search warrant for the apartment, which turned up evidence of the crime.