On Point blog, page 48 of 59
Reasonable Suspicion Issues – Frisk – Minor Traffic Stop – Passenger (Various Factors, Including Nervousness, High-Crime Area)
State v. Joshua O. Kyles, 2004 WI 15, affirming court of appeals’ unpublished decision
For Kyles: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: The following factors did not add up to reasonable suspicion supporting the frisk of a passenger during a routine traffic stop (¶17):
(1) The officer testified that he “didn’t feel any particular threat before searching” the defendant.
(2) The defendant,
Traffic Stop – OWI – Reasonable Suspicion
City of Ripon v. Jonathan Lebese, No. 2009AP2996-FT, District II, 6/16/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Lebese: Wendy A. Patrickus; BiC; Resp.
¶13 The circuit court’s “preliminary ruling” was based on the well-established standards of reasonable suspicion. Lebese’s counsel had proffered that the additional defense witness would corroborate Lebese’s account that he swerved in an evasive maneuver to avoid colliding with the car to his right.
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion, OWI
Shawano Co. v. William P. Pari, No. 2009AP2338-FT, District III, 6/15/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Pari: John S. Bartholomew; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶10 We agree that Pari’s minimal deviations within the traffic lane do not alone give rise to reasonable suspicion that he was operating while intoxicated. See id., ¶¶18-21. Nor do we place great emphasis on that fact here when considering the totality of the circumstances.
State v. Brian A. Oetzman, 2009AP2514-CR, District II, 6/9/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Oetzman: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traffic Stop – U-Turn
¶8 As such, three rules of the road come into play.Under Wis. Stat. § 346.34(1), no person may turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in Wis.
County of Milwaukee v. Caleb L. Manske, 2009AP1779, District I, 6/8/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Manske: Jennifer R. Drow; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion
¶16 Manske submits that because his driving was in some respects not consistent with an impaired driver, Galipo did not have reasonable suspicion to stop him. However, the test for reasonable suspicion is not whether all of the driver’s actions constituted erratic driving.
State v. Michael J. Lonergan, No. 2009AP3001-CR, District III, 5/25/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Lonergan: Owen R. Williams; BiC; Resp.
Reasonable Suspicion – OWI Stop
Stop supported by reasonable suspicion, where vehicle “‘deviated constantly’ from a direct line of travel” and “made several abrupt course corrections,” albeit within its own lane. United States v. Lyons, 7 F.3d 973 (10th Cir. 1993) and United States v.
State v. Cody R. Dewitt, 2009AP2393-CR, District IV, 5/20/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Dewitt: Thomas E. Hayes; BiC; Resp.
Detention for 90 Minutes not Unreasonable
Stop of motorist Dewitt by officer who, because he was off-duty, could not under departmental rules himself perform arrest, wasn’t unnecessarily prolonged by 90 minute delay until on-duty officer could show up.
¶15 Dewitt has presented no evidence to show that Officer Geffert,
State v. Michael S. Miske, 2009AP2841-CR, District II, 5/19/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Miske: Sarvan Singh; BiC; Resp.
Terry Stop – Voluntary Encounter
A voluntary encounter, rather than Terry stop, occurred where Miske came to a stop when approaching two squads flanking “an unlit back country road” at 1:00 a.m.:
¶12 When Miske and his partner stopped, they were on a narrow road,
State v. Joseph R. Davison, 2009AP3091-CR, District II, 4/28/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Davison: Steven Cohen; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Reasonable Suspicion – OWI
Reasonable suspicion found to administer field sobriety tests, where Davison admitted drinking 4 or 5 beers, had alcohol on his breath, was in close proximity to the bar where he had been drinking, and it was bar closing time.
“Bar closing time”
State v. Alan D. Pintar, 2009AP2096-CR, District IV, 4/22/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Pintar: Sarvan Singh; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Probable Cause – Traffic Violation
The police had probable cause to believe Pintar violated § 343.13(1), given uncontroverted testimony that his vehicle “moved across the center skip line (of I-94) into the lane of a car that was approaching from the rear, causing the car to activate its break lights and move out of the way.”