Police Stops: Reasonable Suspicion or Probable Cause?
Police Stops For Drunk Driving in Wisconsin
What's required: Probable Cause or Reasonable Suspicion?
Contact writes,
“While doing research on the Internet in reference to SFST studies, I came across your website. I immediately noticed a very important legal error in the text of your website. In examining your website further, I noticed several more instances of this error. You state that a police officer must have "probable cause" to make a traffic stop or detention. This is incorrect. The standard for detention, which a traffic stop certainly is, is "reasonable suspicion." Reasonable suspicion is a considerably lower standard than probable cause. Probable cause is the standard to which the decision to arrest is held. Your law firm is certainly not the only entity guilty of disseminating this incorrect information. I encounter this on an almost daily basis in my profession, from police officers, defense attorneys, prosecutors and even judges. I feel that it is very important that a law firm such as yours, that specializes in criminal defense, be mindful of the information that it disseminates to the general public. Thank you for your time and understanding in this matter.”
Attorney Wood responds:
While the lesser standard of “reasonable suspicion” is appropriate for criminal offenses, “Operating a Motor Vehicle While Under The Influence” (Wisconsin drunk driving statute) is not a criminal offense in Wisconsin unless it’s a second offense or higher.
Reasonable suspicion is all that’s required for a criminal offense detention, however my position has always been that probable cause is necessary for a traffic stop, and case law supports that position.
In Wisconsin, State vs. Longcore states that probable is required for a traffic stop. On the other hand, Colstad states that it’s reasonable suspicion. The United States Supreme Court in Whren holds that it’s probable cause.
Many of the appeals that I have won which are noted on our website (http://www.vanwagnerwood.com/) contain exact language from the Wisconsin Courts of Appeal, and those state that there was no probable cause for the police stop.
Helpful information:
Wisconsin Courts of Appeal
In Wisconsin vs. Van Wagner & Wood client, the Wisconsin Courts of Appeals held that the mere crossing of the lanes was insufficient to establish probable cause for a police stop and, therefore all evidence acquired during that stop was “fruit of an illegal stop.”
Wood gets reversal on drunk driving conviction
MADISON WISCONSIN. Wisconsin Court of Appeals (14 February 2008). When a Wisconsin State Police Trooper made an illegal stop and thought his expert witness testimony and numerous prior drunk driving arrests (80+ per year) would suffice to get that evidence into a Wisconsin Circuit Court trial, he was right, and it even ended in a conviction for refusing to submit to a blood alcohol test.
Then that client hired Attorney Tracey Wood to appeal his case, and the Wisconsin Court of Appeals agreed with Attorney Wood that a mere gradual crossing over the fog line does not constitute probable cause for a stop, and search and seizure of a person.
Refusing Standardized Field Sobriety, Breath Test & Blood Test
The refusal evidence against Van Wagner & Wood’s client was not offered to demonstrate reasonable suspicion to proceed with an evidentiary blood draw or to establish probable cause to arrest. The evidence was offered to persuade the jury that the suspected drunk driver refused to take the PBT because he feared it would incriminate him. By statute, the PBT result “shall not be admissible in any action or proceeding except to show probable cause for an arrest, if the arrest is challenged, or to prove that a chemical test was properly required or requested of a person under [the implied consent statute].” WIS. STAT. § 343.303.
Illegal Search & Seizure
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution is based upon a premise: every citizen of the United States has a right under the Constitution to a reasonable expectation to privacy. However, those rights are limited. Police however often take liberties in stopping people without probable cause, and arresting people based on illegal foundations.
Arrest
An arrest is a restraint on the arrested person's freedom. The purpose of an arrest is to take a person into custody so that they may be prosecuted for a crime. Police must have probable cause to make an arrest.



