On Point blog, page 119 of 142
Terry Stop — Basis – Informant: Corroboration Lacking
State v. Calvin R. Kolk, 2006 WI App 261
For Kolk: Michael Zell
Issue/Holding: Information provided by a named, citizen informant (that Kolk had picked up drugs in Milwaukee and would be driving to Madison) was insufficiently reliable to support reasonable suspicion of criminal activity:
¶17 To recapitulate, the police were able to corroborate: (1) Kolk’s identity; (2) what kind of vehicle he drove; and (3) the fact that he would drive it,
Terry Stop – Basis – Anonymous Tip, And Suspicious Behavior
State v. Eugene Patton, 2006 WI App 235
For Patton: Daniel R. Clausz
Issue/Holding
¶10 Under appropriate circumstances, an informant’s tip can provide a law enforcement officer with reasonable suspicion to effectuate a Terry stop. Rutzinski, 241 Wis. 2d 729, ¶17; J.L., 529 U.S. at 270. However, before acting on an informant’s tip,
Stop – Basis – Reasonable Suspicion, “Problem Area,” “Lingering” in Car
State v. Charles E. Young, 2006 WI 98, affirming 2004 WI App 227
For Young: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: The police had reasonable suspicion to stop Young because: he was in a parked car with Illinois plates, which had “lingered” for 5 or 10 minutes around midnight around the corner from a bar, in a “problem area”:
¶64 Although there are innocent explanations for why five people would be sitting in a car for five to 10 minutes,
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – Basis – Test: Failure to Yield to Authority
State v. Damian Darnell Washington, 2005 WI App 123
For Washington: Diana M. Felsmann, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶13 In United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980), the Supreme Court stated that “[w]e adhere to the view that a person is ‘seized’ only when, by means of physical force or a show of authority, his freedom of movement is restrained[,]” id.
Terry Stop – Basis – Anonymous Tip, Generally
State v. Eugene Patton, 2006 WI App 235
For Patton: Daniel R. Clausz
Issue: Whether the police had reasonable suspicion to detain on the basis of an anonymous tip, where the suspects not only matched the description of the anonymously-reported armed robbery, but also engaged in potentially suspicious behavior in response to police presence.
Holding:
¶21 Thus, the instant case has more than J.L.
Stop – Basis – Reasonable Suspicion, “Evasion and Flight”
State v. Charles E. Young, 2006 WI 98, affirming 2004 WI App 227
For Young: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: Refusal to obey an officer’s command to halt reinforces extant reasonable suspicion to stop the individual:
¶73 Officer Alfredson testified that after he ordered Young to return to the car the first time, Young “turned and started walking away.”
Stop – Duration – Traffic Offense – Prolonged by Seeking Consent to Search
State v. Calvin R. Kolk, 2006 WI App 261
For Kolk: Michael Zell
Issue/Holding: The (lawful) traffic stop’s purpose concluded when the officer returned Kolk’s license and registration and issued his warning; however, the officer had not released Kolk from the temporary detention caused by the traffic stop when he next asked for consent to search the car and as a result Kolk’s ensuing consent was tainted,
Arrest – Probable Cause – Specific Examples: Obstructing
State v. Charles E. Young, 2006 WI 98, affirming 2004 WI App 227
For Young: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: By fleeing from a police command to stop, the defendant provided probable cause to arrest for obstructing, and the officer therefore was acting with “lawful authority” under § 946.41(1), ¶¶77-78.
Arrest – Test for Custody – Suspect Held in Locked Room More Than Five Hours
State v. Cesar Farias-Mendoza, 2006 WI App 134
For Farias-Mendoza: Randall E. Paulson, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue/Holding: A suspect who had agreed to be transported to police headquarters for questioning was arrested within the meaning of the fourth amendment once the police left him unattended for over five hours in a locked room:
¶23 We disagree with the State’s conclusion. While a defendant is not automatically seized anytime he is taken to a police station for questioning,
Attenuation of Taint — Statements — After Illegal Arrest
State v. Cesar Farias-Mendoza, 2006 WI App 134
For Farias-Mendoza: Randall E. Paulson, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue/Holding: The “causal chain” between the defendant’s illegal arrest and his statement wasn’t attenuated where: he gave the statement within 25 minutes of the circumstance establishing the arrest, ¶¶28-29; there were no intervening circumstances, ¶¶30-31; and, there were suggestions of purposeful misconduct, ¶¶32-34.