Unlawful-stop Claim – Ordinary Inquiry – Suppression of Evidence

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District IV

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Joel R. Davis

Case No.: 2020AP731-CR

Officials: Blanchard, P.J., Fitzpatrick, and Graham, JJ.

Focus: Unlawful-stop Claim – Ordinary Inquiry – Suppression of Evidence

The State appeals an order suppressing evidence found during a traffic stop of Joel R. Davis. The circuit court suppressed the evidence because it determined that law enforcement impermissibly prolonged the stop by asking dispatch to inquire into the conditions of Davis’s release on bond in a pending criminal case. It is undisputed that the officer who stopped Davis sat in his squad car and conducted no recognized tasks incidental to the mission of the stop while he waited for a response to his inquiry about Davis’s bond conditions. The State primarily directs us to Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015), to support its argument that, when police check the conditions of a motorist’s release on bond, this is an “ordinary inquiry” that is incidental to the mission of a lawful stop, rather than an “unrelated investigation” that constitutes an impermissible detour from the mission of the stop.

We conclude that checking for bond conditions is not an “ordinary inquiry” as that term is used in Rodriguez. Therefore, based on the circuit court’s undisputed findings of fact, we conclude that law enforcement unconstitutionally prolonged the traffic stop beyond the time necessary to address the stop’s mission. Accordingly, we affirm.

Recommended for Publication

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is Corporate Counsel, at Salesforce.