On Point blog, page 103 of 143
Warrantless Government Search of Pager Transcript Reasonable, as Furthering Work-Related Purpose
City of Ontario v. Quon, USSC No. 08-1392, 6/17/10
Assuming without deciding that police officer Quon had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the text messages of his department-issued pager, the Court concludes that the warrantless review of Quon’s pager transcript was reasonable because it was motivated by a legitimate work-related purpose and was not excessive in scope.
The 4th amendment came into play because Quon’s employer was a government agency,
Traffic Stop – OWI – Reasonable Suspicion
City of Ripon v. Jonathan Lebese, No. 2009AP2996-FT, District II, 6/16/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Lebese: Wendy A. Patrickus; BiC; Resp.
¶13 The circuit court’s “preliminary ruling” was based on the well-established standards of reasonable suspicion. Lebese’s counsel had proffered that the additional defense witness would corroborate Lebese’s account that he swerved in an evasive maneuver to avoid colliding with the car to his right.
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion, OWI
Shawano Co. v. William P. Pari, No. 2009AP2338-FT, District III, 6/15/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Pari: John S. Bartholomew; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶10 We agree that Pari’s minimal deviations within the traffic lane do not alone give rise to reasonable suspicion that he was operating while intoxicated. See id., ¶¶18-21. Nor do we place great emphasis on that fact here when considering the totality of the circumstances.
Probable Cause – OWI
Bradley K. Darwin, No. 2009AP2608-FT, District IV, 6/10/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Darwin: Bill Ginsberg; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶5 Darwin argues that the officer lacked probable cause to arrest him for OWI. The municipal court made the following findings of fact with respect to probable cause: Darwin signaled a turn, but failed to complete it; he denied drinking;
State v. Brian A. Oetzman, 2009AP2514-CR, District II, 6/9/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Oetzman: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traffic Stop – U-Turn
¶8 As such, three rules of the road come into play.Under Wis. Stat. § 346.34(1), no person may turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in Wis.
County of Milwaukee v. Caleb L. Manske, 2009AP1779, District I, 6/8/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Manske: Jennifer R. Drow; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion
¶16 Manske submits that because his driving was in some respects not consistent with an impaired driver, Galipo did not have reasonable suspicion to stop him. However, the test for reasonable suspicion is not whether all of the driver’s actions constituted erratic driving.
State v. Michael J. Lonergan, No. 2009AP3001-CR, District III, 5/25/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Lonergan: Owen R. Williams; BiC; Resp.
Reasonable Suspicion – OWI Stop
Stop supported by reasonable suspicion, where vehicle “‘deviated constantly’ from a direct line of travel” and “made several abrupt course corrections,” albeit within its own lane. United States v. Lyons, 7 F.3d 973 (10th Cir. 1993) and United States v.
State v. Cody R. Dewitt, 2009AP2393-CR, District IV, 5/20/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Dewitt: Thomas E. Hayes; BiC; Resp.
Detention for 90 Minutes not Unreasonable
Stop of motorist Dewitt by officer who, because he was off-duty, could not under departmental rules himself perform arrest, wasn’t unnecessarily prolonged by 90 minute delay until on-duty officer could show up.
¶15 Dewitt has presented no evidence to show that Officer Geffert,
State v. Dale W. Jenkins, 2009AP2918-CR, District II, 5/19/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Jenkins: Walter Arthur Piel, Jr.; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Search & Seizure – Denial of Motion to Suppress without Evidentiary Hearing
Jenkins’ motion papers were inadequate and the circuit court would have been correct in denying him an evidentiary hearing. All Jenkins filed was a one-page motion with the assertion the officers had looked inside his windows;
State v. Michael S. Miske, 2009AP2841-CR, District II, 5/19/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Miske: Sarvan Singh; BiC; Resp.
Terry Stop – Voluntary Encounter
A voluntary encounter, rather than Terry stop, occurred where Miske came to a stop when approaching two squads flanking “an unlit back country road” at 1:00 a.m.:
¶12 When Miske and his partner stopped, they were on a narrow road,