{"id":8404,"date":"2013-06-07T08:28:48","date_gmt":"2013-02-21T08:33:10","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2014-07-13T21:37:20","modified_gmt":"2014-07-14T02:37:20","slug":"en-us-100","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=8404","title":{"rendered":"WI: Passenger&#8217;s statement \u201cGot a warrant for that?\u201d, was not objection to driver&#8217;s consent to briefcase"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>\u201cGot a warrant for that?\u201d with a laugh is not an unambiguous objection to search of defendant passenger\u2019s briefcase in a car where the driver, defendant\u2019s wife, consented to a search of the whole car. He needed to be more specific because it didn\u2019t even put the officer on notice he was objecting. Defendant could have objected but did not. <a href=\"http:\/\/wicourts.gov\/ca\/opinion\/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&amp;seqNo=92854\">State v. Wantland<\/a>, 2013 WI App 36, 346 Wis. 2d 680, 828 N.W.2d 885 (2013), aff&#8217;d <a href=\"http:\/\/wicourts.gov\/sc\/opinion\/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&#038;seqNo=116898\">State v. Wantland<\/a>, 2014 WI 58,  2014 Wisc. LEXIS 475 (July 11, 2014):<br \/>\n<!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Wantland&#8217;s exchange with the deputy did not amount to such an assertion. A reasonable person would not expect a clear and unequivocal (and serious) identification of one&#8217;s self as the owner of personal property about to be searched and objection to the search of the property to be made with a question such as \u201cGot a warrant for that?\u201d accompanied by laughter and a continued identification of items the deputy could expect to find in searching the briefcase. See Payton, 327 S.W.3d at 478 (concluding that, considering the totality of the circumstances, the defendant&#8217;s exchange with officers, which included the question \u201cWhere&#8217;s your warrant?\u201d did not constitute revocation of his wife&#8217;s consent to search their home). The circuit court correctly found that Wantland did not limit the driver&#8217;s consent to search the vehicle.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=8404\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8404","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8404","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=8404"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8404\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12526,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8404\/revisions\/12526"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8404"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8404"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8404"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}