Terry was arrested and detained on a probation hold. (¶¶2, 5). About ten days later he was charged with obstructing and, on the same day, appeared in court for a probable cause and bail hearing. (¶3). He argues the obstructing conviction should be vacated because he wasn’t given a prompt determination of probable cause after being taken into custody as required by County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991), and State v. Koch, 175 Wis. 2d 684, 499 N.W.2d 152 (1993). The claim is foreclosed by State v. Martinez, 198 Wis. 2d 222, 542 N.W.2d 215 (Ct. App. 1995), which holds that the prompt determination requirement doesn’t apply to detention on a probation hold:
¶9 The case before us differs in no material way from that in Martinez. Terry does not dispute that he was on probation on April 28, 2012, or that he was taken into custody and detained on a probation hold on that date. One and one-half weeks later, a criminal complaint was filed charging Terry with two counts of obstruction of justice related to his interaction with officers when they made contact with him on April 28. From the record and Terry’s brief, it appears a probable cause hearing was held the same day he was criminally charged. Thus, as in Martinez, “the requirements of a probable cause hearing are not applicable” for the time Terry was detained on the probation hold, and once the criminal complaint was filed, he timely received such a hearing. Id. at 233.