Motor Vehicles
Informed consent

In Wisconsin, a police officer wishing to perform a chemical test for intoxication upon a driver must first provide certain information so that the driver can give his or her informed consent. Wis. Stat. § 343.305(4). In State v. Piddington, 2001 WI 24, ¶22, 241 Wis. 2d 754, 623 N.W.2d 528, our supreme court established the rule that an officer must use methods that would "reasonably convey" these warnings. The appellant in this case, Scott Wick, who is hearing impaired and wears hearing aids, contends that the officer who cited him for refusing a chemical test failed to use methods that would reasonably convey the warnings. We disagree and affirm. On the witness stand, Wick and the arresting officer told two very different stories about what happened on the night of Wick's arrest. The trial court believed the officer. We do not reverse factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous, and the trial court's are not. Under the version of the facts adopted by the trial court, the officer had no reason to think that Wick could not comprehend the spoken warnings, and thus no reason to think that the spoken warnings were not reasonably conveyed. This opinion will not be published.

2007AP2563 In the matter of the refusal of Scott R. Wick

Dist II, Waukesha County, Ramirez, J., Brown, C.J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Mishlove, Andrew, Milwaukee; For Respondent: Demski, Catherine Goodman, Elm Grove

Full Text