Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Search and Seizure — dog sniffs

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 22, 2014//

Search and Seizure — dog sniffs

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//January 22, 2014//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Search and Seizure — dog sniffs

Lucas St. Mary appeals from a judgment of conviction for possession with intent to deliver less than 200 grams of marijuana, in violation of Wis. Stat. § 961.41(1m)(h)1. (2011-12). St. Mary pled no contest to the charge after the trial court denied his motion to suppress evidence gathered after a drug-detection dog called to the scene of the traffic stop at issue alerted Winnebago county sheriff’s deputies to the presence of drugs in St. Mary’s vehicle. He contends the deputies violated his Fourth Amendment rights when, “after concluding the traffic stop [related to St. Mary’s expired driver’s license], they continued to detain him without reasonable suspicion of criminal behavior” so the dog could sniff the exterior of the vehicle, which ultimately led to the discovery of the drugs. Because we conclude that our recent decision in State v. House, 2013 WI App 111, 350 Wis. 2d 478, 837 N.W.2d 645, governs, and we agree with St. Mary that he was being unconstitutionally detained when the dog alerted to the subject evidence, we reverse the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress and the judgment of conviction, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. This opinion will not be published.

2013AP661-CR State v. St. Mary

Dist II, Winnebago County, Bissett, J., Per Curiam

Attorneys: For Appellant: Phillips, Steven D., Madison; For Respondent: Weinstein, Warren D., Madison; Gossett, Christian A., Oshkosh

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests