Suppression of Evidence

Listen to this article

WI Supreme Court

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Adam M. Blackman

Case No.: 2017 WI 77

Focus: Suppression of Evidence

This is a review of a published decision of the court of appeals reversing a decision of the Circuit Court for Fond du Lac County, Gary R. Sharpe, Judge. The circuit court granted Adam M. Blackman’s motion to suppress the results of a blood test obtained under Wisconsin’s implied consent law, Wis. Stat. § 343.305(3)(ar)2. (2013-14). The court of appeals reversed the order of the circuit court. The issue presented is whether the consequences for refusing to submit to a blood test requested under Wis. Stat. § 343.305(3)(ar)2. were misrepresented to Blackman and, if so, whether that misrepresentation rendered Blackman’s consent to the blood draw coerced, that is, not freely and voluntarily given under the Fourth Amendment.  Furthermore, if the court concludes that Blackman’s consent to the blood draw was not voluntary consent under the Fourth Amendment, the issue becomes whether the court should apply the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule and admit the evidence of the blood alcohol concentration from the blood draw. For the reasons set forth, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals, affirm the suppression order of the circuit court, and decline to apply the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule in the instant case.

For the reasons set forth, we conclude that the State did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that Blackman’s consent to the blood draw was valid, that is, that it was freely and voluntarily given under the Fourth Amendment. Because the exclusionary rule’s deterrent effect will be served in instant case by suppressing evidence of Blackman’s blood test, we decline to apply the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The results of Blackman’s blood draw are therefore suppressed. Accordingly, the cause is remanded to the circuit court to reinstate its order suppressing the evidence and for further proceedings not inconsistent with the decision of this court.

Reversed and remanded

Concur: Ziegler, J., Gableman, J.

Dissent: Roggensack, C.J.

Full Text