Please visit my author page at amazon.com
State of Wisconsin v. Jessica M. Randall. WI Search & Seizure
The defendant in this Dane County, Wisconsin, case was arrested for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant. She gave the officer permission to take a sample of her blood for determining its alcohol content. But before the state laboratory could test it, she sent a letter revoking the previous consent. The letter also demanded return or destruction of her sample. The state lab nonetheless tested the sample.
The defendant moved to suppress the evidence of the sample, and the Circuit Court agreed that since the consent had been revoked, the evidence would need to be suppressed. The state appealed to the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, which affirmed. The case next headed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which granted a petition to review the case.
The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts.
The defendant argued that there were effectively two searches. The first was when the blood sample was taken. The second search was the laboratory test. She argued that there was no consent for the second search.
The state, however, argued that the search started and ended with the acquisition of the blood sample. Therefore, the search had already been completed when the consent was withdrawn. The court, after examining the authorities, agreed with the state's position.
It also noted that the defendant's argument would lead to an absurd result. If police found a bag of white powder or a gun during a lawful search, they would be unable to analyze the contents or test for fingerprints without undertaking a second search, and obtaining a second warrant.
For this reason, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case.
2019 WI 80, 930 N.W.2d 223 (July 2, 2019).
Please see the original opinion for the court's exact language.
Advertisement:
Richard P. Clem is an attorney and continuing legal education (CLE) provider in Minnesota. He has been in private practice in the Twin Cities for 25 years. He has a J.D., cum laude, from Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul and a B.A. in History from the University of Minnesota. His reported cases include: Asociacion Nacional de Pescadores a Pequena Escala o Artesanales de Colombia v. Dow Quimica de Colombia, 988 F.2d 559, rehearing denied, 5 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1041 (1994); LaMott v. Apple Valley Health Care Center, 465 N.W.2d 585 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991); Abo el Ela v. State, 468 N.W.2d 580 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991).
For more information about attorney Clem, please visit
his website.
For more information about his low-cost CLE programs, please visit his CLE page.
Return to index of case summaries
Copyright 2019, Richard P. Clem.
Attorney Richard P. Clem is responsible for the content of this page.
Richard P. Clem, Attorney
PO Box 14957
Minneapolis, MN 55414
USA
Phone: +1-612-378-7751
e-mail: clem.law@usa.net
Minnesota Attorney Registration Number 0192648
Please visit my author page at amazon.com