On Point blog, page 5 of 141
An update: Big Defense Win: COA rejects state’s attempts to apply canine “instinct exception”
State v. Ashley Jean Campbell, 2020AP1813, 3/5/24, District 3 (recommended for publication); case activity
As a matter of first impression in Wisconsin, the court of appeals holds that regardless of whether the “instinct exception” exists, “the exception does not apply under the facts in this case to excuse the State’s obligation to obtain a warrant prior to searching Campbell’s vehicle.” Op., ¶5. More specifically, the court concludes that the canine “did not instinctively enter Campbell’s vehicle because the officer had full control of the canine and implicitly encouraged it to enter through the driver’s side door.” As a result, the court reverses Campbell’s judgment of conviction and remands with directions to grant her motion to suppress.
COA holds there was probable cause for OWI given admission of drinking up to twelve beers, slurred speech, inability to stand, and .198 PBT (among other evidence)
State v. Nicholas Allen Paulson, 2022AP186, 2/21/24, District III (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
Although Paulson tries to establish that police did not have probable cause to arrest him despite, among other evidence, a PBT reading of .198, COA affirms.
COA upholds traffic stop based on broken taillight
State v. Kevin A. Terry, 2023AP1053-CR, 1/31/24, District II (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
In yet another “broken taillight” OWI, COA holds that the officer had reasonable suspicion to seize Terry based on a relatively minor vehicle malfunction.
Defense Win! Defendant seized without reasonable suspicion during police encounter in parking lot
State v. Joshua L. Thering, 2023AP1253, 1/23/24, District 4 (1-judge decision, not eligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
While the court of appeals agrees the facts in Thering’s case are “similar in significant respects” to the SCOW-approved police encounter in County of Grant v. Vogt, 2014 WI 76, 356 Wis. 2d 343, 850 N.W.2d 253, the court concludes that the totality of the circumstances in Thering’s case “involved a meaningfully greater show of authority by police than in Vogt,” which was characterized as a “close case.” Therefore, the court reverses the circuit court’s order denying Thering’s motion to suppress and his judgment of conviction for OWI 2nd.
COA rejects novel discovery claim and other challenges to child pornography conviction
State v. Jacob Richard Beyer, 2022AP2051, 1/11/24, District 4 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Although Beyer labors mightily at conjuring up legal arguments for reversal, COA is uniformly unpersuaded and unimpressed by his arguments and affirms.
Big Defense Win: COA rejects state’s attempts to apply canine “instinct exception”
State v. Ashley Jean Campbell, 2020AP1813, 1/23/24, District 3 (recommended for publication); case activity
As a matter of first impression in Wisconsin, the court of appeals holds that regardless of whether the “instinct exception” exists, “the exception does not apply under the facts in this case to excuse the State’s obligation to obtain a warrant prior to searching Campbell’s vehicle.” Op., ¶5. More specifically, the court concludes that the canine “did not instinctively enter Campbell’s vehicle because the officer had full control of the canine and implicitly encouraged it to enter through the driver’s side door.” As a result, the court reverses Campbell’s judgment of conviction and remands with directions to grant her motion to suppress.
COA finds probable cause for arrest; reverses suppression in OWI case
State v. Laquanda N. Strawder, 2022AP2112, 1/17/24, District 1 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The circuit court held that police lacked probable cause to arrest Strawder for OWI and suppressed the resulting evidence, including her breath test results. The state appealed, claiming the circuit court’s factual findings and analysis were so lacking the court of appeals should review the factual record ab initio. The court of appeals thinks the trial court did the proper analysis and made sufficient factual findings, but disagrees with its legal conclusion. In the facts as found by the trial court, the court of appeals sees probable cause to arrest, and thus reverses and remands for the prosecution to continue.
COA holds reasonable suspicion supported Act 79 search that may have led to burglary arrest
State v. Wayne L. Timm, 2023AP351, 1/19/24, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The police thought Timm might be responsible for a string of burglaries in the area, and so were looking out for his vehicle. When an officer spotted it one night, he pulled it over for going 31 in a 25. Shining his flashlight into the car, the officer saw the flat end of a tire iron such as could be used to pry things open; the iron was partly covered by a pair of jeans. He searched the vehicle and discovered more potentially “burglarious” tools. Based in part on this evidence, the police secured a GPS warrant for Timm’s car. The GPS tracking led to the discovery of evidence connecting him to specific burglaries. He moved to suppress the search of his car; when that was denied, he entered a plea.
COA reverses order suppressing evidence obtained after traffic stop
State v. Lauren Dannielle Peterson, 2023AP890-CR, 12/29/23, District 4 (one-judge case, ineligible for publication); case activity
Peterson’s circuit court win is short-lived after the court of appeals concludes that reasonable suspicion existed to initiate an OWI investigation and probable cause existed to ask Peterson to perform a preliminary breath test (PBT).
COA upholds traffic stop where motorist nearly struck curb several times, pulled into lot of closed business
State v. Michael Pruett Rudolf, 2022AP157, 10/31/23, District 3 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
An officer saw Rudolf swerve over the fog line and nearly strike the curb several times. Rudolf then drove lawfully for 3/4 of a mile before pulling into the parking lot of a closed auto dealership at 10:40 p.m. The officer detained Rudolf. Lawful stop?