On Point blog, page 141 of 141
WESCL, §§ 968.27 – .37 — Unilateral Public Disclosure Not Authorized – Complaint Containing Such Disclosure Should Be Sealed
State v. Kevin Gilmore, 201 Wis. 2d 820, 549 N.W.2d 401 (1996), affirming, 193 Wis. 2d 403, 535 N.W.2d 21 (Ct. App. 1995)
For Gilmore: Robert R. Henak
Issue/Holding:
We hold that while WESCL does not authorize the State’s unilateral public disclosure of intercepted communications in a criminal complaint, the State may incorporate intercepted communications in a complaint if the State files the complaint under seal with the circuit court.
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – Basis – Vehicle: Armed Robbery Investigation
State v. Anthony Harris, 206 Wis. 2d 243, 557 N.W.2d 245 (1996), reversing unpublished decision of court of appeals
For Harris: Robert J. Diaz
Issue/Holding:
The only specific and articulable facts of the record before us, namely that a vehicle pulled away from the curb close to the robbery suspect’s address, and that the vehicle contained several black males, do not amount to reasonable,
Reasonable Suspicion — Stop — Duration — Seeking Consent to Search Automobile After Purpose of Stop Fulfilled
State v. Daniel L. Gaulrapp, 207 Wis. 2d 600, 558 N.W.2d 696 (Ct. App. 1996)
For Gaulrapp: Ralph A. Kalal
Issue/Holding: Asking the motorist, during a routine stop for a muffler violation, if he had drugs or weapons and then obtaining permission to search the vehicle didn’t illegally extend the detention:
The trial court here made extensive findings, and the record supports its findings. The court found the detention was of a short duration and the request to search was made within a reasonable time.
Expectation of Privacy — Automobile Passenger — “Standing” to Challenge Stop
State v. Anthony Harris, 206 Wis. 2d 243, 557 N.W.2d 245 (1996), reversing unpublished decision of court of appeals
For Harris: Robert J. Diaz
Issue: Whether passenger who is not target of vehicle stop has standing to challenge its lawfulness.
Holding:
… [M]ost of the federal circuit courts have held that a traffic stop of a vehicle constitutes a seizure of any of the passengers.
Reasonable Suspicion – Frisk – High-Crime Area, et al.
State v. Michael T. Morgan, 197 Wis. 2d 200, 539 N.W.2d 887 (1995)
For Morgan: Wm. J. Tyroler, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; Calvin Malone
Issue/Holding:
… The court of appeals then held that the search of Morgan was supported by articulable facts in the record, including the “fairly-high-crime-rate area”; Morgan’s driving in two alleys at approximately 4:00 a.m.; Morgan’s nervous and unsuccessful efforts to produce a driver’s license upon request;
Warrants – Probable Cause – Search “All Persons” Provision
State v. Nakia N. Hayes, 196 Wis. 2d 753, 540 N.W.2d 1 (Ct. App. 1995)
For Hayes: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
Next, Hayes argues that innocent persons could become caught up in the “all occupants” provisions of the search warrant. This obviously is true. But it does not necessarily invalidate the warrant. The test is not whether innocent persons might be present on the premises,
Attenuation of Taint — Statements
State v. Wilfred E. Tobias, 196 Wis.2d 53, 538 N.W.2d 843 (Ct. App. 1995)
For Tobias: Barbara A. Cadwell
Issue/Holding1:
The primary concern in attenuation cases is whether the evidence objected to was obtained by exploitation of a prior police illegality or instead by means sufficiently attenuated so as to be purged of the taint. Anderson, 165 Wis.2d at 447-48, 477 N.W.2d at 281.