 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
City of Mequon v. Peacock12/11/2002
le suspicion de novo. Id.
. The temporary detention of a citizen constitutes a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and triggers Fourth Amendment protections. State v. Harris, 206 Wis. 2d 243, 253, 557 N.W.2d 245 (1996). A police officer may, in the appropriate circumstances, approach an individual for purposes of investigating possible criminal behavior even though there is no probable cause to make an arrest. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22 (1968). When police make an investigative stop of a person, it is not an arrest and the standard for the stop is less than probable cause. State v. Allen, 226 Wis. 2d 66, 70-71, 593 N.W.2d 504 (Ct. App. 1999). The standard is reasonable suspicion, "a particularized and objective basis" for suspecting the person stopped of criminal activity. Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690, 696 (1996) (citation omitted). When determining if the standard of reasonable suspicion was met, those facts known to the officer must be considered together as a totality of the circumstances. State v. Richardson, 156 Wis. 2d 128, 139-40, 456 N.W.2d 830 (1990).
. In Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000), the United States Supreme Court addressed whether an uncorroborated anonymous tip could create the necessary reasonable suspicion to justify a Terry stop. J.L., 529 U.S. at 268. In J.L., the police received an anonymous telephone call reporting that "a young black male standing at a particular bus stop and wearing a plaid shirt was carrying a gun." Id. The police had no audio recording of the call nor did they know anything about the informant. Id. Police officers went to the bus stop, saw fifteen-year-old J.L. wearing a plaid shirt and immediately frisked him without having any other reason to suspect illegal conduct. Id. The Court explained that the case involved a totally anonymous tip that failed to demonstrate the informant's veracity. Id. at 270. The anonymous call left the police without the means to test the informant's knowledge or credibility. Id. at 271. The Court recognized that under such circumstances, the police were required to corroborate the tip. See id. at 270. However, to corroborate a tip, the Court explained, the police must do more than verify easily obtainable information that tends to identify the suspect; they must verify information that tends to indicate the informant's basis of knowledge about the suspect's alleged illegal activity. Id. at 271-72. Based on these conclusions, the Court determined that the anonymous tip lacked any indicia of reliability and did not justify the investigative stop. Id. at 271.
. In State v. Rutzinski, 2001 WI 22, , 241 Wis. 2d 729, 623 N.W.2d 516, our supreme court considered whether an anonymous cell-phone call from an unidentified motorist provided sufficient justification for an investigative traffic stop. The arresting officer in Rutzinski received a dispatch based upon a cell-phone call from an unidentified motorist advising of a truck driving erratically. Id. at . The anonymous tipster remained on the line providing the dispatch with information that permitted the responding officer to strategically position his squad car and await the suspected drunk driver. Id. at . When the truck passed his location, the officer pulled his car behind the truck; the dispatcher then stated that the tipster had indicated that he or she was in the vehicle ahead of the truck and the officer was following the correct vehicle. Id. at . Although the officer did not independently observe any signs of erratic driving, he conducted a traffic stop of the truck. Id. at .
. The court recognized that in some circumstances, information contained in an informant's tip could justify an investigative s
Page 1 2 3 4 Wisconsin DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|