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
H. Exclusionary rule
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
State v. John R. Maloney, 2004 WI App 141, affirmed on other grounds, 2005 WI 74 For Maloney: Lew A. Wasserman Issue/Holding: ¶11. The trial court held that there had been no violation of SCR 20:4.2 and that even if there had been, suppression would not be the remedy. We agree with the trial court that suppression is not… Read more
State v. Peter R. Cash, 2004 WI App 63 For Cash: Lynn M. Bureta Issue/Holding: Any violation of § 175.40(6), which regulates the arrest power of an officer operating outside territorial jurisdiction would not support suppression as a remedy: ¶30. Assuming arguendo that the Waukesha County Sheriff’s Department had not adopted the written policies required by Wis… Read more
State v. Joseph Steffes, 2003 WI App 55, PFR filed 3/13/03 For Steffes: Daniel P. Ryan Issue/Holding: Violation of administrative code provision does not support suppression. ¶¶9, 25. But: this decision was based largely on State ex rel. Peckham v. Krenke, 229 Wis. 2d 778, 601 N.W.2d 287 (Ct. App. 1999), a case that was essentially overruled… Read more
State v. James W. Keith, 2003 WI App 47, PFR filed 3/5/03 For Keith: Christopher A. Mutschler Issue/Holding: Evidence not suppressible merely because seized by officer effectuating stop outside of his or her jurisdiction: there is no “reason to ignore the well-established rule that suppression is required only when evidence is obtained in violation of a… Read more
State v. Jeffrey L. Loranger, 2002 WI App 5, PFR filed 1/22/02For Loranger: Richard B. Jacobson, James C. Murray Issue: Whether evidence illegally obtained through warrantless use of a thermal imaging device, in reliance on then-valid Wisconsin appellate court decision subsequently invalidated by a Supreme Court decision, must be suppressed. Holding: Warrantless use of a thermal imaging… Read more
