Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

01-1473 State v. Espinoza

By: dmc-admin//January 28, 2002//

01-1473 State v. Espinoza

By: dmc-admin//January 28, 2002//

Listen to this article

“The State argues that ‘Espinoza’s denial of involvement in a crime which there is probable cause to believe he committed, as a matter of law, establishes probable cause that he also committed the crime of o[b]structing.’ This broad, sweeping contention disregards the principle of Peters [v. State, 70 Wis.2d 22], which states that before a charge is made under Wis. Stat. sec. 946.41, the district attorney should have sound reasons for believing that statements made by a suspected defendant to the police were knowingly and intentionally made for the purpose of deceiving and misleading the police, and not simply out of a good faith desire to defend against an accusation of crime. …

“It seems that the intent of the legislature in Wis. Stat. sec. 946.41 was to prevent the waste of time, energy and expense involved in having law enforcement officers running down false leads concerning criminal conduct. Doubtless the legislature intended to circumscribe conduct which would frustrate or thwart the police function. The State makes no claim that Espinoza’s mere denial of wrongdoing thwarted the police function. And though truth and morality may have required Espinoza to answer in the affirmative when he was questioned regarding the tire incident, we cannot say that the law required him to do so.”

Order affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist II, Winnebago County, Schmidt, J., Anderson, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: John M. Daniels, Oshkosh

For Respondent: Steven P. Weiss, Madison

Polls

Should Wisconsin Supreme Court rules be amended so attorneys can't appeal license revocation after 5 years?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests