WI: Failure to object to comment about refusal to consent was IAC

In an eyewitness ID case, it was IAC for defense counsel to fail to object to the prosecutor’s eliciting that defendant refused to consent to taking DNA evidence and then argue in it close. The other IAC claims are moot by the granting of a new trial. State v. Banks, 2010 WI App 107, 328 Wis. 2d 766, 790 N.W.2d 526 (App. 2010).

Changing lanes without signaling is not a violation of the law unless other cars are nearby such that it would be a hazard. Therefore, defendant’s stop was without probable cause. State v. Feaster, 2010 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 603 (July 21, 2010).*

A dog sniff at the open window of his car was not a violation of the Washington Constitution’s protection of privacy. “The trial court correctly concluded that Hartzell did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the air coming from the open window of the vehicle. Hartzell was not in the SUV when the dog sniffed from a lawful vantage point outside the vehicle. The sniff was only minimally intrusive. The trial court did not err when it denied Hartzell’s motion to suppress the evidence.” State v. Hartzell, 2009 Wash. App. LEXIS 3318 (November 16, 2009).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.