On Point blog, page 22 of 36
Officer had reasonable suspicion to continue detention and administer field sobriety tests
Marquette County v. Randy S. Tomaw, 2013AP1510, District 4, 3/6/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Tomaw was going 17 miles over the speed limit at 1:20 on a Sunday morning. He did not appear to respond to the officer’s initial attempt at contact, his upper body swayed as he walked to the rear of his vehicle, and the officer detected the “strong odor” of alcohol on his breath.
Even if field sobriety tests constitute a “search” under the Fourth Amendment, police may request them based on reasonable suspicion of impairment
Village of Little Chute v. Ronald A. Rosin, 2013AP2536, District 3, 2/25/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Rosin argues that field sobriety tests are searches under the Fourth Amendment because “[a]n inherent right as a human being is to control and coordinate the actions of [his or her] own body[,]” and, therefore “a fundamental expectation of privacy is implicated when a person is subject to the performance of [field sobriety tests].” (¶12).
Reading old implied consent form didn’t taint admissibility of blood test results
State v. Lawrence A. Levasseur, Jr., 2013AP2369-CR, District 4, 2/6/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The arresting officer used an implied consent form that pre-dated the 2009 amendments to § 343.305, so it omitted language about accidents involving death or serious injury–language that did not apply to Levasseur’s situation. The use of the outdated form didn’t strip the resulting blood test result of its statutory presumption of admissibility and accuracy,
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).
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.
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.
Failure of squad video to corroborate every detail of officer’s testimony doesn’t defeat trial court’s findings of fact
State v. Steven L. Udelhofen, 2013AP1244-CR, District 4, 11/14/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court’s findings of fact regarding the circumstances of the stop of Udelhofen are not clearly erroneous despite the fact that he squad car video didn’t corroborate all the details of the officer’s testimony regarding his observations, applying State v. Walli, 2011 WI App 86,
Police had reasonable suspicion to stop driver to investigate both OWI and theft
Sun Prairie v. Brent D. Curry, 2013AP1206, District 4, 11/7/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Police had reasonable suspicion to stop Curry, who was driving on a residential street at 3:40 a.m., turned around, sped past the officer’s car, and then turned at a high rate of speed into the driveway of a residence. He then sat in the car for a few minutes before getting out and walking up the driveway;
Trial court’s findings of fact in support of reasonable suspicion were not clearly erroneous
State v. Nick A. Lutter, 2012AP2586, District 4, 10/31/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court’s findings of fact at the suppression hearing were not clearly erroneous, and they supported the court’s conclusion there was reasonable suspicion to stop Lutter. Among other reasons for the stop, the state trooper cited Lutter’s crossing the fog line twice and driving onto the fog line once.