On Point: 2. Traffic stops

court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); BIC; Resp.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

Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion
Stop was supported by reasonable suspicion, given trial court findings that “Johnson’s vehicle crossed the fog line and drifted across the lane to the area of the center line, weaved from the right to the left while negotiating curves in the road, moved close enough to the center line on a curve to cause concern that it might collide with an oncoming vehicle,

court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); BiC; Resp. Br.; Reply

Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion – § 346.072(1)
“We are satisfied that a reasonable officer could reasonably suspect that, by driving 28 to 30 miles per hour in a 25-mile-per-hour zone within 2 to 3 feet of the squad cars, Statz did not slow down, maintain a safe speed for traffic conditions,

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); Resp Br. (Baake); Reply (State)

Traffic Stop – Failure to Yield to Stopped Police Vehicle
Stop for failure to yield unsupported: “§ 346.072, by its plain language, only requires a motorist to change lanes if there are two or more lanes in the motorist’s direction of travel and it is safe to do so,” ¶11; no “testimony that Baake failed to slow down or that he was traveling at an unsafe speed,

court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication)

Vehicle Stop – Rear Plate State Name Obscured
Stop OK where rear plate bracket obscured name of state.

court of appeals decision (1-judge; not eligible for publication)

Traffic Stop
Reasonable suspicion to stop vehicle for violating § 346.31(2), right hand turns to be made close as practicable to right-hand edge curb or highway.

court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication)

Vehicle Stop – Rear Plate State Name Obscured
Stop proper where rear plate bracket obscured name of state, even though “America’s Dairyland” visible at bottom of plate;  pretextual nature of stop irrelevant.

court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication)

Vehicle Stop – Reasonable Suspicion – Anonymous Tip Insufficient
Anonymous tip “from an unknown informant calling from an unknown location” that driver in restaurant parking lot pouring out beer insufficiently reliable to support subsequent stop, where no traffic violations or erratic driving observed.

State v. Leneral Louis Williams, 2010 WI App 39; for Williams: Richard L. Zaffiro; Resp Br.; Reply Br.

Seizure – Some Restraint Necessary

¶16      The Fourth Amendment is not implicated until there has been a seizure. The Court in Terry described a seizure as “whenever a police officer accosts an individual and restrains his [or her] freedom to walk away.” Id.

court of appeals decision; for Conaway: Philip J. Brehm; for Griffin: Michael S. Murphy

Reasonable Suspicion for Traffic Stop, Excessive Window Tint, Generally

¶3    The window tint regulation at issue here is easily summarized. Rear window tinting is permitted only if the window allows at least 35% of light to pass through, except that the limitation does not apply to tinting done during the original manufacture of a vehicle. 

State v. Michael L. Popke, 2009 WI 37, reversing unpublished opinion
For Popke: John Miller Carroll, Aaron W. Schenk

Issue / Holding:

¶26      In the case at hand, the officer had reasonable suspicion that the defendant was operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated. Similar to the specific and articulable facts observed by the officer in Post, the officer in this case made the following observations over the course of approximately one block at 1:30 a.m.: The defendant was driving with three-quarters of the vehicle left of the center of the road;