State v. Richard L. Verkler, 2003 WI App 37 For Verkler: Christopher A. Mutschler Issue/Holding: ¶1. In State v. Reitter, 227 Wis. 2d 213, 217-18, 595 N.W. 2d 646 (1999), our supreme court held that law officers are under no affirmative duty to advise custodial defendants that the right to counsel does not apply to the… Read more
4. Procedure
Village of Little Chute v. Todd A. Walitalo, 2002 WI App 211, PFR filed 8/1/02 For Walitalo: Ralph A. Kalal Issue/Holding: ¶11. However, the arresting officer, by reading the informing the accused form, simply stated the truth: If Walitalo refused to submit to a chemical test, his driving privileges would be revoked. This statement did not involve… Read more
State v. Donald Marshall, 2002 WI App 73, PFR filed 2/28/02 For Marshall: Richard L. Zaffiro Issue: Whether, after the OWI arrestee refused consent for a blood draw, the police could then obtain “consent” for the draw by threatening to use physical force. Holding: Marshall’s argument that § 343.305(9)(a), by providing the exclusive police option for refusal… Read more
State v. Michael J. Carlson, 2002 WI App 44, PFR filed 1/17/02 For Carlson: Christopher A. Mutschler Issue: Whether Carlson was entitled to have his refusal charge dismissed with prejudice because his driver’s license was improperly revoked for nineteen days before he was granted a hearing. Holding: Due process protections — with respect to a hearing before… Read more
State v. Darin W. Baratka, 2002 WI App 288, PFR filed 10/20/02 For Baratka: Michael C. Witt Issue/Holding: ¶12 Baratka claims that he was not properly informed of his choices and was therefore unable to understand his rights regarding chemical testing. In order for Baratka to prove he was not adequately informed, he must show: 1. Has the… Read more
State v. Michael S. Piddington, 2001 WI 24, 241 Wis. 2d 754, 623 N.W.2d 528, affirming State v. Piddington, 2000 WI App 44, 233 Wis.2d 257, 607 N.W.2d 303 For Piddington: Michelle Ann Tjader Issue: Whether BAC results were suppressible because the profoundly deaf defendant could not have heard the implied-consent law recitation of rights. Holding: ¶1… Read more
State v. Paul J. VanLaarhoven, 2001 WI App 275 For VanLaarhoven: Michele Anne Tjader Issue: Whether a blood sample, properly obtained under the Implied Consent law, may be analyzed without a warrant. Holding: The Implied Consent law requires that all who apply for a driver’s license consent not only to provide a sample, but also a chemical… Read more
State v. Robert W. Wodenjak, 2001 WI App 216, PFR filed 8/31/01 For Wodenjak: Rex Anderegg Issue: Whether administration of a blood test, following OWI arrest, was reasonable under the fourth amendment, where the police first rejected the driver’s request for a (less invasive) breath test. Holding: As long as the standard for warrantless blood draw established… Read more
