On Point blog, page 37 of 142
SCOTUS will decide whether Microsoft has to provide emails sought under warrant when the emails are stored overseas
United States v. Microsoft Corp., USSC No. 17-2, certiorari granted 10/16/17
Whether a United States provider of email services must comply with a probable-cause-based warrant issued under 18 U.S.C. § 2703 by making disclosure in the United States of electronic communications within that provider’s control, even if the provider has decided to store that material abroad.
Justice Kelly a maverick? An update on on 4th Amendment cases in the Wisconsin Supreme Court
According to the latest edition of SCOWstats, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has been taking more 4th Amendment cases then ever. How are the justices voting? You might be surprised. Click here.
May the 4th be with you: Another warrantless home entry authorized under the community caretaker doctrine
State v. Sierra Ann Desing, 2017AP490-491, 10/11/17, District 2, (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A citizen informant told 911 that he saw Desing pulled over on the side of the road hanging out her door. He asked if she was okay and was told “yes,” but he later saw her driving erratically on the highway. Deputies went to her house, knocked “loudly,” received no response, discovered her back door and patio door open on May 28 at 7:30 a.m., saw her dog running loose in the backyard, and, fearing that she might be choking on her own vomit, entered the house and searched until they found her asleep in the basement.
Probable cause to arrest found!
State v. Sarah A. Schmidt, 2017AP724-CR, District 2, 10/11/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
For operating while intoxicated, no less—even though there was scant evidence of impaired driving and the driver exhibited no slurred speech and apparently normal balance and motor coordination.
Checkpoint stop justified by “special needs” of law enforcement
State v. Damien Markeith Divone Scott, 2017 WI App 74; case activity (including briefs)
In this case of first impression in Wisconsin, the court of appeals holds that the stop of a car at a police checkpoint was justified by the “special needs” of law enforcement.
Circuit court’s prerogative to credit only part of officer’s testimony dooms challenge to traffic stop
State v. Dustin M. Sherman, 2016AP2225, 10/5/17, District 4, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Sherman argued that police lacked reasonable suspicion to conduct the traffic stop that led to his refusal to submit to a blood alcohol test. The officer stopped him for a violation of the statute requiring a tail lamp to emit a red light plainly visible from a distance of 500 feet to the rear. §347.13(1). When asked how close he had to get before he could see Sherman’s tail lamp, the officer said “I couldn’t tell you but it was less than 500 feet.”
Unknown casino employee counts as a “citizen informant”
State v. Michael J. Mansfield, 2016AP2423-CR, 10/3/17, District 3 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Mansfield argued police didn’t have reasonable suspicion to detain him based on a tip from an anonymous Turtle Lake Casino employee. The court of appeals holds the tipster should be treated as a citizen informant and, under the standard for citizen informants, the tip provided reasonable suspicion.
SCOTUS to address scope of 4th Amendment’s automobile exception
Collins v. Virginia, USSC No. 16-1027, cert granted 9/28/17; lower court opinion; USSC docket; SCOTUSblog page
Question presented: Whether the Fourth Amendment’s automobile exception permits a police officer, uninvited and without a warrant, to enter private property, approach a house and search a vehicle parked a few feet from the house.
SCOTUS to consider driver’s expectation of privacy in a rental car when he isn’t on the rental agreement
Byrd v. United States, USSC No. 2016-1371, cert granted 9/28/17; 3rd Circuit’s opinion; docket; SCOTUSblog page
Question presented:
A police officer may not conduct a suspicionless and warrantless search of a car if the driver has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the car–i.e., an expectation of privacy that society accepts as reasonable. Does a driver have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a rental car when he has the renter’s permission to drive the car but is not listed as an authorized driver on the rental agreement.
Officer had reasonable suspicion to detain driver for field sobriety tests
State v. Sarah Ann Wallk, 2017AP61, Distirct 1, 9/26/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The court of appeals rejects Wallk’s claim that there was insufficient reasonable suspicion to detain her for field sobriety tests after she was stopped for speeding.