≡ Menu

Arrest – Fresh Pursuit

State v. Randall Lee Sugden, 2012AP408-CR, District 4, 10/15/12

court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity

Arrest in Richland County by a Sauk County deputy sheriff was justified under the fresh pursuit doctrine, § 175.40(2). State v. Haynes, 2001 WI App 266, 248 Wis. 2d 724, 638 N.W.2d 82, discussed and applied:

¶12      Applying Haynes to the facts of this case, we conclude that Deputy Clauer’s initial traffic stop of Sugden was valid because Deputy Clauer was in fresh pursuit under Wis. Stat. § 175.40(2).  First, the deputy acted without unnecessary delay because he immediately activated his emergency lights after twice observing Sugden cross over the centerline. Second, Deputy Clauer’s pursuit was uninterrupted because he followed Sugden continuously from the time he first observed Sugden cross over the centerline in Sauk County to the time that Sugden stopped his vehicle about a fourth of a mile from the Richland County line.  Third, there was a short period of time between the commission of the traffic violation, the commencement of the pursuit, and Sugden’s apprehension.  After activating his lights, Deputy Clauer drove only a couple hundred feet before Sugden stopped his car and was apprehended.  Here, as in Haynes, any minimal delay in time was caused by Sugden’s refusal to immediately pull over.  We note that, in contrast to the officer in Haynes who drove for a few miles before Haynes stopped his vehicle, in this case Deputy Clauer drove only a couple hundred feet before Sugden stopped.  See id., ¶7; see also Collar, 148 Wis. 2d at 843 (concluding that a stop was valid under the fresh pursuit doctrine when “the periods of time between the commission of the offense, the commencement of the pursuit, and the apprehension of the suspect were very short, spanning several minutes at most”).  We further note that there is no requirement under Wis. Stat. § 175.40(2) that an officer request mutual assistance before making an initial stop.

After the stop, the officer derived a reasonable suspicion that Sugden was intoxicated, justifying expansion of the stop to include FSTs, which in turn led to probable cause to arrest for OWI, ¶13.

{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment