On Point: 2. Traffic stops

State v. Jerome Hoehne, 2009AP2561-CR, District 4, 9/15/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Hoehen: Bill Ginsberg; BiC; Resp.; Reply

Probable Cause – Traffic Violation: Driving in Center Lane

Driving in the center lane of a 3-lane highway did not support probable cause to arrest for a traffic violation:

¶8        On appeal,

City of Tomah v. Matthew Pudlow, 2010AP1044, District 4, 9/15/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Pudlow: Rick Niemeier, Maggie Premo; BiC; Resp.; Reply

Traveling in reverse at 30 mph, near an intersection with a highway, provided reasonable suspicion to stop:

¶13      The totality of the circumstances provided Officer Furlano with reasonable suspicion to justify an investigative stop of the vehicle in order to investigate Pudlow’s driving behavior,

City of Oshkosh v. Richard A. Selquist, 2010AP862, District 2, 9/1/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Selquist: Walter Arthur Piel, Jr.; BiC; Resp.; Reply

The police had reasonable suspicion to continue temporary detention of Selquist and to request filed sobriety testing while investigating a traffic accident:

¶7        …  In reviewing whether the officer’s further investigation and request for field sobriety tests were warranted,

County of Milwaukee v. Katherine R. Harmon, 2010AP297, District 1, 8/24/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Harmon: Basil M. Loeb; BiC; Resp.

Traffic stop supported by reasonable suspicion of impaired driving based on: driving on lane-divider lines, crossing lane-divider by half-foot, and “jerkiness in … front steer tires.”

The court notes that while “merely weaving within the confines of a driver’s traffic lane is not sufficient to support reasonable suspicion sufficient to make a traffic stop …,

State v. Randall L. Wegener, 2010AP452-CR, District 1, 8/18/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wegener: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.

Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop

Inclement winter weather didn’t obviate the need to stay within the proper lane, such that crossing the center line, even briefly a few times, provided reasonable suspicion to perform a traffic stop.

¶6        Wegener argues that Fabry did not have reasonable suspicion to conduct a traffic stop because he was driving appropriately for part of the time he was followed and blames his lack of control of his vehicle on the snowy weather conditions.

State v. James Casas Klausen, 2009AP2268, District 4, 8/12/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Klausen: Tracey A. Wood; BiC; Resp.

Traffic Stop – No Wisconsin DL

Wisconsin law “contemplates that a person with a valid out-of-state driver’s license who becomes a Wisconsin resident has sixty days, after becoming a Wisconsin resident, to apply for a Wisconsin license,” ¶6.

State v. Laurence Evan Olson, 2010AP149-CR, District 4, 8/5/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Olson: Christopher W. Dyer; BiC; Resp.; Reply

¶11      WISCONSIN STAT. § 347.13(1) provides that “[n]o vehicle originally equipped at the time of manufacture and sale with 2 tail lamps shall be operated on a highway during hours of darkness unless both such lamps are in good working order.” WISCONSIN STAT. 

State v. Eric Michael Webley, No. 2010AP747-CR, District 4, 7/29/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Webley: Steven Cohen; BiC; Resp.

The police had reasonable suspicion believe Webley was driving with a blood alcohol level exceeding 0.02, and thus to perform field sobriety tests, after an indisputably proper stop for speeding, given the following (in addition to which, Webley admitted having had two beers):

¶8 … 

State v. Kevin A. Rhyne, No. 2009AP163, District 4, 7/29/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); pro se; Resp. Br.

¶7        “An officer may conduct a traffic stop when he or she has probable cause to believe a traffic violation has occurred.” State v. Popke, 2009 WI 37, ¶13, 317 Wis. 2d 118, 765 N.W.2d 569 (citing State v.

State v. Brittany A. Meye, No. 2010AP336-CR, District II, 7/14/10

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Meye: Kevin G. Keane; BiC; Resp.; Reply

¶6        Meye argues that the odor of intoxicants alone is insufficient to raise reasonable suspicion to make an investigatory stop. We agree. We will not cite, chapter and verse, all the many cases in this state where either we or our supreme court found facts sufficient for an investigatory stop.