On Point blog, page 107 of 143
State v. Stanley W. Puchacz, 2010 WI App 30
court of appeals decision; for Puchacz: William M. Hayes
Resp Br
OWI Enhancer, § 346.65(2) – Out-of-State Conviction
Michigan convictions for driving while visibly impaired may be counted as Wisconsin OWI priors, given “broad interpretation and application of the final phrase in Wis. Stat. § 343.307(1)(d) and the public policy supporting our drunk driving laws,” ¶¶12-13.
Traffic Stop – Deviating from Center Line, § 346.05
Crossing center line,
County of Grant v. Kaleena E. Collins, 2009AP 2469-FT, Dist IV, 1/14/20
court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication)
Vehicle Stop – Rear Plate State Name Obscured
Stop OK where rear plate bracket obscured name of state.
State v. Mary B. Schaetzer, 2009AP1796-CR, Dist II, 1/13/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not eligible for publication)
Traffic Stop
Reasonable suspicion to stop vehicle for violating § 346.31(2), right hand turns to be made close as practicable to right-hand edge curb or highway.
State v. Hezekiah Laster, Jr., 2009AP692-CR, Dist III, 1/12/10
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication)
Arrest – Probable Cause
Arrest based on probable cause where drug informant identified photo of Laster as person he just bought drugs from.
County of Grant v. Kaleena E. Collins, 2009AP 2469-FT, Dist IV, 1/14/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication)
Vehicle Stop – Rear Plate State Name Obscured
Stop proper where rear plate bracket obscured name of state, even though “America’s Dairyland” visible at bottom of plate; pretextual nature of stop irrelevant.
State v. John D. Tischer, Sr., 2009AP992-CR, Dist IV, 1/14/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication)
Vehicle Stop – Reasonable Suspicion – Anonymous Tip Insufficient
Anonymous tip “from an unknown informant calling from an unknown location” that driver in restaurant parking lot pouring out beer insufficiently reliable to support subsequent stop, where no traffic violations or erratic driving observed.
Seizure of Person: Some Restraint Necessary; Reasonable Suspicion: Stop of Car: No Front Plate – “Frisk” of Car
State v. Leneral Louis Williams, 2010 WI App 39; for Williams: Richard L. Zaffiro; Resp Br.; Reply Br.
Seizure – Some Restraint Necessary
¶16 The Fourth Amendment is not implicated until there has been a seizure. The Court in Terry described a seizure as “whenever a police officer accosts an individual and restrains his [or her] freedom to walk away.” Id.
State v. Sameeh J. Pickens, 2010 WI App 5, reconsideration denied
court of appeals decision; for Pickens: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate
Reasonable Suspicion for Detention and “Collective Knowledge” Doctrine
Although, “under the collective knowledge doctrine, an investigating officer with knowledge of facts amounting to reasonable suspicion may direct a second officer without such knowledge to stop and detain a suspect,” the state must prove those underlying facts. “Proof is not supplied by the mere testimony of one officer that he relied on the unspecified knowledge of another officer,” ¶¶12-13.
State v. Phillip Brian Conaway / Craig Griffin, 2010 WI App 7
court of appeals decision; for Conaway: Philip J. Brehm; for Griffin: Michael S. Murphy
Reasonable Suspicion for Traffic Stop, Excessive Window Tint, Generally
¶3 The window tint regulation at issue here is easily summarized. Rear window tinting is permitted only if the window allows at least 35% of light to pass through, except that the limitation does not apply to tinting done during the original manufacture of a vehicle.
State v. Antonio K. Phillips, 2009 WI App 179
court of appeals decision; for Phillips: Michael J. Backes; case activity
Warrantless Entry – Exigent Circumstances
¶8 There are four exigent circumstances that may justify a warrantless search: “(1) an arrest made in ‘hot pursuit,’ (2) a threat to safety of a suspect or others, (3) a risk that evidence will be destroyed, and (4) a likelihood that the suspect will flee.” State v.