Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

Trial court’s findings of fact in support of reasonable suspicion were not clearly erroneous

State v. Nick A. Lutter, 2012AP2586, District 4, 10/31/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity

The circuit court’s findings of fact at the suppression hearing were not clearly erroneous, and they supported the court’s conclusion there was reasonable suspicion to stop Lutter. Among other reasons for the stop, the state trooper cited Lutter’s crossing the fog line twice and driving onto the fog line once. (¶¶2-3). While his squad car video recording only showed Lutter traveling along the edge of the fog line, the trooper testified Lutter crossed over the fog line twice before recording began. (¶6). Lutter claimed the recording started earlier, and thus showed he never crossed the fog line. (¶9). The circuit court credited the trooper’s testimony, and nothing in the record supports Lutter’s claim that the video began earlier than the trooper said it did. (¶¶7, 10). Thus, the trial court’s findings of fact are not contrary to the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence and so will not be upset. State v. Popke, 2009 WI 37, ¶20, 317 Wis. 2d 118, 765 N.W.2d 569.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment