Explore in-depth analysis
On Point is a judicial analysis blog written by members of the Wisconsin State Public Defenders. It includes cases from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, and the Supreme Court of the United States.
Important posts
Ahead in SCOW
Sign up
Search Warrants – Probable Cause – Multi-Unit Building
State v. Adrian J. Jackson, 2008 WI App 109 For Jackson: Craig S. Powell; Brian Kinstler Issue: Whether a warrant established probable cause to search either the entirety of a multi-unit residential building. Holding: ¶19 The magistrate was told only that the informant saw Jackson with two guns “at the residence of 4124 N. 21st Street” […]
Search Warrants – Scope – Particularity Requirement: Violated Where Target’s Address Must Be Verified
State v. Michael Anthony King, 2008 WI App 129 For King: Mark S. Rosen Issue/Holding: A search warrant that conditions its execution on verification of the target’s address violates the 4th amendment’s particularity requirement: ¶25 … The Fourth Amendment clearly sets forth the particularity requirement that must be satisfied prior to issuance of a warrant. … The […]
Search Warrants – Particularity Requirement – Multi-Unit Building (Duplex)
State v. Adrian J. Jackson, 2008 WI App 109 For Jackson: Craig S. Powell; Brian Kinstler Issue/Holding: A warrant describing the building to be searched only as “a two-story duplex residence” did not satisfy the particularity requirement: ¶9 If the location to be searched is not described with sufficient particularity to inform officers which unit in […]
Warrants – Scope – Business Records
State v. Louis H. LaCount, 2008 WI 59, affirming 2007 WI App 116 For LaCount: T. Christopher Kelly Issue: Whether execution of a search warrant for business records exceeded the warrant’s scope in that the warrant: authorized only the search for and seizure of records that related to a specific business with specifically named clients; and also authorized […]
Search Warrants – Staleness – Drug Transaction, 30 Days Old
State v. Michael Anthony King, 2008 WI App 129 For King: Mark S. Rosen Issue/Holding: Search warrant based on drug transaction occurring 30 days earlier lacked probable cause, ¶32 n. 7: … From our review of the record, it would appear that probable cause as to the search of his residence was stale. The most recent information directly […]
Search Warrants – “Technical Irregularity,” § 968.22 – Accurate Identification of Target in Warrant Application but Inaccurate Description in Warrant Itself
State v. Eric Dwayne Rogers, 2008 WI App 176, PFR filed 12/12/08 For Rogers: Mark D. Richards Issue/Holding: Incorrect identification of automobile on face of warrant was mere technical irregularity based on “scrivener’s error”: ¶15 In this case, the executing officer had personal knowledge and the officer attached and incorporated a correct affidavit. The affidavit correctly identified […]
Wisconsin Electronic Surveillance Control Law, §§ 968.31(2)(b)-(c) – Construction, Generally – Relevance of Federal Decisions
State v. Brian Harold Duchow, 2008 WI 57, reversing unpublished decision For Duchow: Melinda A. Swartz, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶15 Extrinsic sources include legislative history. Id. The drafting records of the Electronic Surveillance Control Law state that the law “represents Wisconsin implementation of the electronic surveillance portion of [Title III],” the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets […]
Electronic Surveillance Control Law, §§ 968.31(2)(b)-(c) — “Oral Communications” — No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy by School Bus Driver in Statements Recorded While Transporting Student
State v. Brian Harold Duchow, 2008 WI 57, reversing unpublished decision For Duchow: Melinda A. Swartz, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue: Whether a school bus driver’s statements surreptitiously recorded by a voice-activated tape recorder in the student’s backpack were suppressible under WESCL. Holding: ¶2 The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether Duchow’s tape-recorded statements were “oral communication” as […]
Allocution, Victim’s – Prohibiting Defendant from Looking at Victim
State v. Lawrence Payette, 2008 WI App 106, PFR filed 6/30/08 For Payette: Robert R. Henak; Amelia L. Bizzaro Issue/Holding: ¶51 The trial court, having just heard a lengthy description of Payette’s violent and abusive conduct toward RS, directed that Payette not look at his victim during her statement to the court, because, the trial court […]
First Amendment – Overbreadth – “True Threat” – False Bomb Scare
State v. Robert T., 2008 WI App 22For Robert T.: Bradley J. Bloch Issue: Whether § 947.015 (2003-04) (“Bomb Scares”) is overbroad and therefore cannot support prosecution for a phoned-in but false bomb threat. Holding: ¶12 Robert T. argues that the statute suffers from overbreadth because it prohibits speech that could be protected. We disagree. Prior Wisconsin opinions […]
On Point is sponsored by Wisconsin State Public Defenders. All content is subject to public disclosure. Comments are moderated. If you have questions about this blog, please email [email protected].
On Point provides information (not legal advice) about important developments in the law. Please note that this information may not be up to date. Viewing this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship with the Wisconsin State Public Defender. Readers should consult an attorney for their legal needs.