WI: ShotSpotter alert and furtive movements within 60 seconds of alert is RS

Wisconsin explains ShotSpotter alerts and developing reasonable suspicion. Officers arrived almost immediately without lights and sirens and looked for people. They saw the defendant who was acting evasively. That, with the alert, was reasonable suspicion. State v. Nimmer, 2022 WI 47, 2022 Wisc. LEXIS 65 (June 23, 2022):

In the course of responding within one minute after receiving a ShotSpotter report of gunfire in a residential neighborhood, the officers saw a single suspect near the scene make furtive movements suggesting concealment of a handgun. Looking at “the whole picture,” as the officers were required to do, they made a well-informed and reasonable inference that Nimmer might be the shooter. See Genous, 397 Wis. 2d 293, ¶9 (quoting Cortez, 449 U.S. at 417-18). They did not act on a “mere hunch[.]” See Navarette, 572 U.S. at 397 (internal quotation marks removed).

[*P38] Although this is the first occasion for this court to evaluate reasonable suspicion in the context of a ShotSpotter report, our court of appeals has considered whether the proximity of a person’s presence shortly after shots were fired satisfies reasonable suspicion. For example, in State v. Norton, No. 2019AP1796-CR, unpublished slip op., ¶¶14, 17 (Wis. Ct. App. Apr. 14, 2020), the court of appeals concluded the totality of analogous circumstances constituted reasonable suspicion to stop and investigate the defendant: ….