On Point blog, page 65 of 142
Analysis of blood drawn without warrant before–but tested after–McNeely held admissible
State v. Andrew J. Kuster, 2014AP109-CR, District 2, 9/17/14 (one-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This seemingly run-of-the-mill OWI appeal has an interesting little wrinkle. The police conducted a warrantless blood draw on Kuster before SCOTUS decided Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S.__, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013), but they didn’t have the blood tested until after the decision came out. This sequence of events did not trouble the court of appeals because it views the seizure and subsequent analysis of a person’s blood as a single event.
Court scolds State for shoddy advocacy, holds alleged “stop” was actually an arrest without probable cause
State v. Thomas J. Anker, 2014 WI App 107; case activity
If a conservation warden shouted “you’re under arrest,” ordered you to stop walking, forcibly handcuffed you, and restrained you in his car until he could turn you over to investigating authorities, would you think you were under arrest or simply “temporarily detained”? The State, with a straight face, claimed these facts showed a Terry stop. The court of appeals, with a stern tone, rebuked the State and sharply criticized its brief.
Police had reasonable suspicion to prolong stop and conduct protective sweep
State v. Elisa Estrada, 2013AP2803-CR, District 2, (not recommended for publication); case activity
Estrada did not challenge the legality of the law enforcement’s decision to stop her vehicle for a traffic violation. Her appeal focused on the decision to extend the stop longer than necessary to address a suspended registration in order to investigate a robbery that had occurred about 50 minutes earlier. She highlighted weaknesses in the facts cited to show reasonable suspicion, but the court of appeals found them plenty strong enough.
Officer reasonably assumed that the car’s owner was driving
State v. Travis Daniel Thom, 2014AP613-CR, District 3, 9/9/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
A police officer reasonably assumed a car was being driven by the owner where there was no additional information suggesting someone else was driving.
Police had probable cause to arrest for operating with a detectable amount of a controlled substance
State v. Alpesh D. Shah, 13AP2755, District 1, 9/9/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Police officers’ observations of Shah and his driving supplied probable cause to arrest Shah for operating with a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood.
Tip from one student provided reasonable grounds for search of another student
State v. Chase A.T., 2014AP260, District 4, 9/4/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
A student’s tip to an assistant principal that a bathroom “smelled like marijuana smoke” and that a student named Chase walked out of the bathroom immediately before the tipster smelled the smoke provided reasonable grounds for the assistant principal to search Chase. In addition, the search of Chase was not excessive in scope. Thus, his motion to suppress was properly denied.
Police had reasonable basis to stop car for failing to signal
State v. Deborah K. Salzwedel, 2014AP301-CR, District 4, 9/4/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court’s finding that Salzwedel’s act of turning without signaling affected the movement of other traffic was not clearly erroneous, and therefore the officer had a reasonable basis to stop Salzwedel for violating § 346.34(1)(b).
Arresting officer provided accurate information regarding implied consent law
State v. Victor J. Godard, 2014AP396-CR, District 4, 8/28/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The arresting officer provided Godard with accurate information about the implied consent law and thus did not cause Godard to refuse to submit to the implied consent blood test or deny him his right to a second test.
Police had sufficient basis to request PBT
State v. Jeanmarie Carini, 2014AP526-CR, District 2, 8/27/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
There was reasonable cause to believe Carini was driving while impaired and therefore police properly asked her to submit to a preliminary breath test.
Minor may consent to recording of conversation under § 968.31’s one-party consent rule
State v. Price G. Turner, III, 2014 WI App 93; case activity
A minor does not as a matter of law lack the capacity to consent to police interception of the minor’s conversations with another person and therefore vicarious consent by a parent is not required.