State v. James A. Schmidt, 2004 WI App 235 For Schmidt: Daniel S. Diehn Issue: Whether § 343.305(5)(a) requires that the driver request an additional test after the police have administered the primary test and, if not, whether Schmidt’s pre-blood draw request for a breathalyzer was properly rejected. Holding: ¶11. Although Wis. Stat. § 343.305(4) and (5) use… Read more
4. Procedure
State v. Ibrahim Begicevic, 2004 WI App 57 For Begicevic: Donna J. Kuchler Issue: Whether reading the “Informing the Accused” form in English to a non-English speaking driver was an unreasonable way of conveying required implied consent warnings. Holding: ¶21. Kennedy did not attempt to obtain an interpreter. When Kennedy read the Informing the Accused in… Read more
State v. James W. Keith, 2003 WI App 47, PFR filed 3/5/03 For Keith: Christopher A. Mutschler Issue/Holding: ¶10 WISCONSIN STAT. § 343.305(5)(a) requires police to offer an alternative chemical test to persons who submit to a chemical test under § 343.305 and who request an alternative test. … ¶12 The record shows that after Keith’s arrest, while traveling… Read more
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
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
