State v. Andrew J. Kuster, 2014AP109-CR, District 2, 9/17/14 (one-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity This seemingly run-of-the-mill OWI appeal has an interesting little wrinkle. The police conducted a warrantless blood draw on Kuster before SCOTUS decided Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S.__, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013), but they didn’t have the blood tested until… Read more
b. Blood Draw
State v. Kent W. Hubbard, 2014AP738-CR, District 2, 8/13/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity The totality of the circumstances established probable cause to arrest Hubbard for operating with a detectable level of restricted controlled substance. Further, the warrantless blood draw was justified under the exigent circumstances test articulated in State v. Bohling, 173 Wis. 2d 529… Read more
Waukesha County v. Dushyant N. Patel, 2013AP2292, District 2, 5/14/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity The result of a blood draw done in violation of Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013), are admissible under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule because police acted in conformity with clear, well-settled Wisconsin law that permitted the blood draw at… Read more
State v. Neil A. Morton, 2013AP2366-CR, District 4, 4/17/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity This is another OWI case holding that a warrantless blood draw that would now be unlawful under Missouri v. McNeely is admissible under the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. Déjà vu. Morton appealed an OWI conviction arguing that the circuit court… Read more
State v. Cassius A. Foster, 2011AP1673-CRNM: Review of a court of appeals summary disposition; case activity State v. Alvernest Floyd Kennedy, 2012AP523-CR: Review of an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity State v. Michael R. Tullberg, 2012AP1593-CR: Review of an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity Issues presented (composed by On Point) Whether the draw… Read more
State v. William A. Reese, 2014 WI App 27; case activity The results of a driver’s blood test should not be suppressed even if they were obtained without a warrant and in the absence of exigent circumstances in violation of Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013), because the arresting officer acted in good faith… Read more
The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Missouri v. McNeely marked a big change for Wisconsin. Click here for On Point’s analysis of the case. If you’re yearning for more information on what McNeely means for Wisconsin OWI cases, you might want to watch this half-hour program on Wisconsin Eye. It features Dane County Judge… Read more
Missouri v. McNeely, USSC No. 11-1425, 4/17/13 United States Supreme Court decision, affirming State v. McNeely, 358 S.W.3d 65 (Mo. 2012) In a decision that works a major change in Wisconsin law governing nonconsensual, warrantless blood draws in OWI cases, the U.S. Supreme Court holds the evanescent quality of alcohol in a suspect’s bloodstream does not in… Read more
