H. Exclusionary rule

State v. Michelle R. Popenhagen, 2008 WI 54, reversing 2007 WI App 16 For Popenhagen: James B. Connell Issue: Whether statements made when confronted with documents produced in violation of § 968.135 subpoena procedure are suppressible. Holding: ¶81 The defendant’s motion to suppress the incriminating statements in the present case is substantially similar in nature to a motion… Read more

State v. Christopher D. Sloan, 2007 WI App 146 Issue/Holding: ¶26 The trial court here did not find a nexus in the affidavit between the items sought and the house to be searched. Nonetheless, the trial court concluded, in deference to the judge who signed the warrant, that “[t]here’s the good faith exception here. If… Read more

State v. Cesar Farias-Mendoza, 2006 WI App 134 For Farias-Mendoza: Randall E. Paulson, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: The “causal chain” between the defendant’s illegal arrest and his statement wasn’t attenuated where: he gave the statement within 25 minutes of the circumstance establishing the arrest, ¶¶28-29; there were no intervening circumstances, ¶¶30-31; and, there were suggestions of… Read more

State v. Bill P. Marquardt, 2005 WI 157, on certification; prior history: 2001 WI App 219 For Marquardt: John Brinckman; Patricia A. Fitzgerald Issue/Holding: The good-faith exception is inapplicable when indicia of probable cause are so lacking as to render official belief in its existence unreasonable. This inquiry is distinct from the question of whether the supporting facts… Read more

State v. Bill P. Marquardt, 2005 WI 157, on certification; prior history: 2001 WI App 219 For Marquardt: John Brinckman; Patricia A. Fitzgerald Issue/Holding: The search warrant was supported by sufficient “indicia of probable cause” to trigger the good-faith exception, including the following: Marquardt had not been seen for two days following his mother’s homicide, raising suspicion about… Read more

State v. Bill P. Marquardt, 2005 WI 157, on certification; prior history: 2001 WI App 219 For Marquardt: John Brinckman; Patricia A. Fitzgerald Issue/Holding: The “significant investigation” requirement of State v. Eason, 2001 WI 98 is satisfied: ¶52      Investigator Price estimated that over the course of March 13 and 14, a total of 20 law enforcement officers had become… Read more

State v. David J. Roberson, 2005 WI App 195, affirmed on other grounds, 2006 WI 80 For Roberson: Richard D. Martin, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: “(E)vidence acquired outside of the home after an in-home arrest in violation of Payton is not a product of the illegal governmental activity, if officers had probable cause to arrest developed apart from the illegal… Read more