On Point blog, page 1 of 2
COA concludes investigative stop was valid in OWI decision recommended for publication
State v. Jody William Solom, 2024AP691-CR, 3/19/25, District II (recommended for publication), case activity
Solom appeals from a judgment convicting him of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI), sixth offense. He asserts the investigative stop was unlawful and should have been suppression. COA disagrees and affirms.
Can the State carry its burden of proof on suppression without calling any witnesses?
State v. Lindsey Dawayne Neal, 2017AP1397-CR, 4/3/18, District 1, (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
According to the court of appeals, yes. The State’s allegations in its complaint and a dashcam video were sufficient to prove reasonable suspicion that Neal parked his car in a manner to obstruct traffic on a highway in violation of Milwaukee Traffic Code 101-24.1. Neal himself asked to call the arresting officers to testify, but the circuit court refused. Who needs witnesses? Hearings are much more efficient without them.
Time, place, quick turn, hanging out in parking lot = reasonable suspicion of OWI
State v. Gregory J. McMillan, 2016AP127-CR, 12/16/2016, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
12:30 a.m., Saturday, Dodge Charger, driving away from tavern-rich area of McFarland. No bad driving, but a “relatively sudden” right turn with a squad two car lengths behind. The turn is onto a dead-end street with only “large industrial-type buildings.” Officer drives around a back way and sees McMillan standing at the back of his car talking on his phone. From where he’s standing, McMillan could have snuck into the shadows had he seen the squad following him, instead of coming around a back way. Officer stops McMillan. Reasonable suspicion?
Being in alley at 3 a.m., walking into bushes suspicious
State v. Arturo Luiz-Lorenzo, 2015AP1540-CR, 5/18/2016, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Police discovered cocaine on Luiz-Lorenzo as a result of his arrest; he challenges the grounds for the initial Terry stop.
Stop – Basis – Test: Failure to Yield to Authority / Hodari D.
State v. Charles E. Young, 2006 WI 98, affirming 2004 WI App 227
For Young: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶26 Under Hodari D. and Kelsey, an uncomplied-with show of authority cannot constitute a seizure. …
…
¶37 Mendenhall is the appropriate test for situations where the question is whether a person submitted to a police show of authority because,
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – Basis – Test: Failure to Yield to Authority
State v. Damian Darnell Washington, 2005 WI App 123
For Washington: Diana M. Felsmann, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶13 In United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980), the Supreme Court stated that “[w]e adhere to the view that a person is ‘seized’ only when, by means of physical force or a show of authority, his freedom of movement is restrained[,]” id.
Terry Stop – Basis – Anonymous Tip, Generally
State v. Eugene Patton, 2006 WI App 235
For Patton: Daniel R. Clausz
Issue: Whether the police had reasonable suspicion to detain on the basis of an anonymous tip, where the suspects not only matched the description of the anonymously-reported armed robbery, but also engaged in potentially suspicious behavior in response to police presence.
Holding:
¶21 Thus, the instant case has more than J.L.
Stop – Basis – Reasonable Suspicion, “Evasion and Flight”
State v. Charles E. Young, 2006 WI 98, affirming 2004 WI App 227
For Young: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: Refusal to obey an officer’s command to halt reinforces extant reasonable suspicion to stop the individual:
¶73 Officer Alfredson testified that after he ordered Young to return to the car the first time, Young “turned and started walking away.”
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – Basis – Flight
State v. Kelsey C.R., 2001 WI 54
For Kelsey C. R.: Susan Alesia, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether the police seizure of Kelsey, after she fled upon encountering them, was based on reasonable suspicion that she had committed, or was about to commit, a crime.
Holding: (Lead, 3-vote opinion:)
¶42 … Upon de novo review, we conclude that the circuit court’s determination that Kelsey’s appearance,
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – Basis – Automobile – Investigate Earlier Crime
State v. Alisha M. Olson, 2001 WI App 284
For Olson: Daniel P. Fay
Issue: Whether the police had reasonable suspicion to make a traffic stop to investigate the driver for a burglary two days earlier.
Holding:
¶8. In the present case, we find sufficient facts to give rise to a reasonable suspicion that Olson had committed a crime. The Waukesha County Sheriff’s Department did not pull Olson’s name out of a hat.