On Point blog, page 72 of 142
Traffic stop based on seat belt violation didn’t preclude frisk of passenger
State v. Dartanian Lemont Lewis, 2013AP454-CR, District 1, 1/28/14; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Lewis was a passenger in a car stopped for safety belt violations. During the stop he was frisked, leading to the discovery of cocaine. He argued the frisk was improper because § 347.48(2m)(gm) prohibits police from taking an individual into physical custody solely for failing to wear a safety belt.
No warrant, no affidavit, no worries. Failure to file suppression motion wasn’t ineffective assistance of counsel
State v. James Howard, 2013AP190-CR; 1/22/14; District 1; (not recommended for publication); case activity
Howard, a former correctional officer, was convicted of 2nd and 3rd degree sexual assault of an inmate at the Milwaukee County Criminal Justice Facility. On appeal he argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) move to suppress buccal swab evidence obtained without a warrant, (2) move to suppress penile swab evidence because the warrant for it was not supported by an affidavit,
Police had reasonable suspicion for traffic stop despite some discrepancies between description in dispatch and car actually stopped
State v. Chad Allen Nelson, 2013Ap1926-CR, District 3, 1/22/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Scene: The parking lot of Frosty’s Outpost, on County Road H in rural Bayfield County, 2:00 a.m. Police get a dispatch: Someone’s damaging a patron’s vehicle in the parking lot. Before an officer can respond dispatch sends an update: The suspects are bear hunters, and they left in a blue Dodge pickup with a hound box heading toward the bear camp west of Ino on Highway 2.
Lack of probable cause to administer first PBT didn’t taint subsequent field sobriety tests and second PBT
State v. Derek S. Strasen, 2013AP1523-CR, District 2, 1/22/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
There was no probable cause to administer an initial PBT to Strasen, who was stopped for speeding, even though he emitted a faint smell of intoxicants, had bloodshot and “glossy” eyes, and said he had been drinking but had his consumed his last drink over 12 hours earlier. (¶¶2, 4).
U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether warrantless search of cell phone incident to arrest violates Fourth Amendment
David L. Riley v. California, USSC 13-132
Whether evidence admitted at petitioner’s trial was obtained in a search of petitioner’s cell phone that violated petitioner’s Fourth Amendment rights.
Lower court opinion: People v. Riley, No. D059840 (Cal. App. 4th Dist., Feb. 8, 2013) (unpublished)
United States v. Brima Wurie,
Court of appeals upholds stop based on informant’s tip and officer’s observation
Village of Hales Corners v. David E. Adams, 2013AP1128, 1/14/13, District 2 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
Welcome to another court of appeals decision holding that police had reasonable suspicion to stop a person for drunk driving. In this particular case, an informant tipped off a police dispatcher, who then informed an officer in the vicinity about a possible drunk driver. Armed with a vehicle description and a license plate number,
Car in a ditch provides reasonable suspicion that traffic violation occurred
State v. David Lawrence Eastman, 2013AP1401-CR, District 3 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
A police officer may conduct a traffic stop when he has grounds to reasonably suspect that either a crime or a traffic violation has or will be committed. See State v. Popke, 2009 WI 37, ¶23, 317 Wis. 2d 118, 765 N.W.2d 569; State v.
Drive-through employee’s observation and tip provide reasonable suspicion for OWI stop
State v. Mary J. Kamuchey, 2013 AP1684-CR, District 4, 12/19/13 (1-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity
Issue: Whether an anonymous “citizen informant’s” call from a McDonald’s drive-through at 2:00 a.m., describing an argumentative driver who smelled of alcohol and was believed to be drunk, provided reasonable suspicion for OWI stop even though the officer who made the stop did not observe signs of erratic driving or intoxication?
Driver has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his vehicle registration or driver’s license information
State v. Daniel R. Folkman, 2013AP1363-CR, District 3, 12/17/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
A deputy on patrol checked the license plate of an oncoming car. The check showed the car belonged to Folkman. The deputy then checked Folkman’s license status, which was expired, so the deputy stopped the car, ultimately resulting in Folkman’s arrest for OWI. (¶2). The court of appeals rejects Folkman’s claim the deputy needed some valid reason to initiate the registration and license checks.
State v. Derik J. Wantland, 2011AP3007-CR, petition for review granted 11/21/13
Review of published court of appeals decision; case activity
Issue (composed by On Point)
When the passenger of a car asks a police officer searching the car if he has “got a warrant for that?” before the officer opens a briefcase found in the hatchback of the car, has the driver’s general consent to search the car been limited?
For more factual background about this an interesting and novel issue in Wisconsin,