Search and Seizure — warrantless searches – consent — withdrawal

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Criminal

Search and Seizure — warrantless searches – consent — withdrawal

After consent has been given for a warrantless search, a suspect’s question “Got a warrant for that?” is not an unambiguous withdrawal of consent; and police officers confronted with ambiguous statements are not under a duty to ask follow-up questions to clarify the ambiguity.

“Under the analysis of these cases, Wantland’s question ‘Got a warrant for that?’ must be deemed ambiguous. Such a question may constitute an inquiry regarding the officer’s lawful authority to search the briefcase, but it is far from an unequivocal withdrawal of consent. Deputy Brockway’s response, ‘I can, uh, open the laptop,’ was responsive to Wantland as Deputy Brockway already had legal authority for the search from the driver. Moreover, Wantland’s listing out the contents of the briefcase failed to clearly indicate that Deputy Brockway no longer had consent to search the briefcase.”

Affirmed.

2011AP3007-CR State v. Wantland

Ziegler, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Alesia, Susan E., Madison; Breedlove, Tristan , Madison; For Respondent: DeCecco, Joseph R., Sheboygan; Larson, Sarah K., Madison