On Point blog, page 16 of 59
Extension of stop, FSTs okay, no reversal for error of law regarding probable cause for PBT
State v. Bradley E. Ammann, 2017AP866-CR, 12/7/17, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A state trooper stopped Ammann for speeding as he and his wife were driving home from a wedding reception. The trooper asked Amman to exit the car and then smelled intoxicants on him. This led to field sobriety tests and then a preliminary breath test showing that Ammann had an .068 alcohol concentration. He almost escaped with a mere citation for speeding except the trooper had to go and check his driving record.
Quasi-anonymous tip, prolonged stop at at intersection gave reasonable suspicion for stop
State v. Xavier Grullon, 2016AP2404-CR, District 3, 11/28/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A tip from a 911 caller together with an officer’s observations provided reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop, holds the court of appeals.
Good faith exception to exclusionary rule applies to pre-Rodriquez dog sniff
State v. James R. Stib, 2017AP3-CR, District 2, 11/15/17 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Stib argues his traffic stop was unlawfully prolonged to conduct a dog sniff under Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (2015). Assuming Stib is correct, suppression of the evidence seized after the dog alerted is inappropriate under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule because the dog sniff was conducted in objectively reasonable reliance on then-existing precedent, namely, State v. Arias, 2008 WI 84, 311 Wis. 2d 358, 752 N.W.2d 748.
De novo review of squad video supported finding of reasonable suspicion for traffic stop
State v. David L. Miller, 2017AP685-CR, 11/9/17, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Miller moved to suppress evidence of OWI on the grounds that the deputy who stopped him lacked reasonable suspicion. The suppression hearing involved two types of evidence: (1) the deputy’s testimony, and (2) the squad video. Miller asked the court of appeals to review the squad video de novo and to publish a decision saying that it is appropriate for appellate courts to do so. The court of appeals saw no need for publication. It found that the trial court denied suppression based on the deputy’s testimony and only used the video to assess his credibility.
COA: parking-lot encounter with police was consensual
State v. Matthew P. Elliott, 2016AP2363, 11/8/17, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A police officer in his squad followed a vehicle from a bar for a short time before the vehicle turned into the parking lot of a closed restaurant. A couple minutes later, the officer returned and parked behind the still-running car, the driver of which appeared to be unconscious. The officer did not have his emergency lights or his spotlight on. The driver got out of the car and approached the squad and the officer too got out. The officer asked for identification, and shortly thereafter noted sings of intoxication ultimately leading to arrest.
Stop, frisk for weapons justified
State v. Marcellous D. Tally-Clayborne, 2016AP1912-CR, District 1, 10/17/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Tally-Clayborne challenges his carrying a concealed weapon conviction, arguing he was unlawfully stopped, detained and searched because police had no information suggesting he was involved in any illegal activity. The court of appeals holds both the stop and pat-down search were justified.
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.
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.