On Point

State v. William A. Anderson, 2025AP796, 4/29/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA reversed the circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress because law enforcement’s community caretaker function did not justify seizing a possible witness to a motorcycle accident.

Washington County v. J.E.C.,  2025AP2798, 4/29/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

COA relies on the respondent’s frequent absconding from her group home to find dangerousness and also holds that the existing Ch. 55 order is insufficient to meet J.E.C.’s needs.

Winnebago County v. Michael Jon Potratz, 2025AP1059, 4/29/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress the results of his blood draw based on the factors established by SCOW in Artic .

State v. Shawn Clarke Spottswood, 2023AP1763-CR, 4/28/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)

Spottswood appeals the circuit court’s denial of his suppression motion after having entered a plea to receiving or concealing stolen property. On appeal, he again challenges the warrantless search of his vehicle, contending that law enforcement lacked reasonable suspicion that he had committed, was committing, or was about to commit an offense sufficient to justify the search under 2013 Wis. Act 79 and WIS. STAT. § 973.09(1d).

State of Wisconsin v. Derrick John Grignon, 2024AP1595-CR, 4/28/26, District III (recommended for publication); case activity

In a decision recommended for publication, COA applies contract law principles to a deferred judgment agreement and finds that the State properly moved to revoke the agreement following Grignon’s noncompliance with its terms.

County of Trempealeau v. Layne Perry Stenberg, 2024AP281, 4/21/26, District III (recommended for publication); case activity

Stenberg argues that Wis. Stat. § 343.305(2), Wisconsin’s implied consent law, is unconstitutional, both facially and as applied to him. Specifically, he argues that the implied consent law violates the unconstitutional conditions doctrine by requiring him to “forfeit” his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches for the privilege of operating a motor vehicle on a public highway, and that it violates the least intrusive means test under the Fourth Amendment. COA rejects Stenberg’s arguments.

Monroe County Department of Human Services v. A.S., 2026AP65-66, 4/23/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity

Although A.S. raises multiple challenges to this TPR, COA uniformly finds her arguments unavailing.

Jackson County v. D.C., 2025AP1838 & 2025AP1839, 4/23/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA reversed D.C.’s commitment order and the order extending his commitment because the County did not meet its burden to establish he was dangerous.

D.C. v. R.W., USSC No. 25-248, 2/25/2025, reversing In re R.W., 334 A.3d 593 (D.C. 2025); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs)

SCOTUS reverses DC Court of Appeals decision that an officer stopped R.W. without reasonable suspicion and in violation of the Fourth Amendment based on the totality of the circumstances.

State v. John R. Phelan, 2024AP777-CR, petition for review of an published court of appeals decision, granted 4/22/26; case activity

In a unique statutory construction case, SCOW will determine the scope of authority allocated to DNR wardens in enforcing the criminal law.