Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 134

Thread: Questioned by Officers (3rd OC in Walmart)

  1. #1
    Regular Member Rbwhanson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Hartford, WI
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post

    So I went to Walmart in Hartford at Noon today. This time was to do the major weekly grocery shopping. I successfully OC's my first two times ever in the same Walmart the few days earlier. This time I was in shorts and a t-shirt, not looking nearly as nice as I was the last two times as I was in work clothes.

    I finish my shopping at about 12:30 and a manager (didn't get his name) asked me why was carrying and holstered and I told him for self defense. He asked me if I was law enforcement or anything and I stated that I wasn't. He said well it is Walmart policy that you cannot have a firearm in our store. I proceeded to say very well, can I get your regional managers name and number. He gave it to me (Conrad Schaefer 262-251-5847, that is his work line M-F) He then told me while he knows state laws and agrees with them, that this is a corporate policy.

    I get to the parking lot and see 3 cop cars, conveniently enough parked in the same row as me. I proceed to put all the bags in my car I get 1/2 way through and see an officer walking towards me. He get's within 5yds of me so I know he is coming to me. I proceed to say "Good Afternoon Officer". And he said keep your hands where I can see them. I keep them on the cart and he asks me for my ID, so I proceed to hand him my State ID after warning him it was in my back pocket. He states that he is not arresting me, but there was a complaint of me carrying in Walmart. He then asks to see my firearm so that he can run it through the database. (Two more cops walk up). I let him know it is locked properly in my trunk. I get my keys and unlock the trunk (this is the point where the don't talk to cops video starts running through my head....a bit too late). I grab the case and hand it to another cop and state that the serial number is clearly marked on the outside, but that I will open it if necessary. They open it with my key and run it, of course it comes back legal.

    Then the officer proceeds to say that They are not arresting me although some cities such as Milwaukee are arresting. I ask what for, and he states Disorderly Conduct. He asks if I have ran into trouble carrying anywhere else and I state that I have not. He asks that I do not carry again in Walmart. I then ask how it is considered disorderly conduct. He gives me some run down about yelling fire at a movie theater. I tell him that I have already emailed the Senator in regards to the disorderly conduct law. I tell him currently the disorderly conduct law is wrong and should e changed and give him my own analogy of the law. I tell him technically the way you are telling me "If I was walking down the street with my dog on a leash and a neighbor can call me in if they don't like it, and I can be arrested for walking a dog". He says "Right" He says just because that the Attorney Generals interpretation of it does not make it law. He said that this will have to be answered at a Supreme court level as it probably will. He asks me for my phone number, and I oblige. He then asks me if I have anymore questions. I state "No" shake his hand and thank him for his time.

    I forgot to get his name in the heat of the moment, but started getting more clear on things I should have done as I was driving. In small cities like Hartford I assume every cop has his/her own car. His car number was #5 and plate# was 3870.


    I obviously will not carry in Walmart until I can talk to corporate and the store manager. Any good contacts, besides the regional guy I got? Also I know most of it, but what should I have done differently? This disorderly conduct law seriously needs to be re-written....


    -Ryan Hanson
    Member: Wisconsin Carry Inc.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Rbwhanson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Hartford, WI
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post

    The Officers stated I was also their first time responding to an OC issue.
    Member: Wisconsin Carry Inc.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Appleton, WI
    Posts
    276

    Post imported post

    I say this as my intentions, in the same situation i dont know what i would have REALLY done... but anyway.


    i dont think he had any right to check your gun... on what grounds?! they cant just go to a range and start running people's guns, why should they run a law-abiding citizens guns. And i would have elaborated on the disorderly conduct after he said you can be arrested for the dog walking thing... because i'm pretty sure it specifies that it cant be coming from a hypersensitive person, and has to be reasonable. thats a bunch of crap

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Never freely hand over your fire arm. Let the police take the fire arm and make it known you do not consent to that or any searches.

    You also do not have to give your ID. Giving the officer your name is enough and you actually do not have to do that.

    Watch the video "Busted" on you tube and the other videos by flexyourrights.org.

    As well as the video titled "why you should never talk to the police."

    Do this as soon as possible before you end up in jail, convicted and have your fire arms rights lost.

    Educate yourself before you carry!

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322

    Post imported post

    Walmart follows state laws, so it is legal to carry in Walmart.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Rbwhanson wrote:
    He then asks to see my firearm so that he can run it through the database.
    What database? Wisconsin does not maintain a database that I know and it certainly knows nothing of my guns. If he removed your gun from your hands then it was impermissibly seized.

    You could reasonably conclude that you were not free to leave by their force of numbers. You were detained.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Madison/The Northwoods, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    If he removed your gun from your hands then it was impermissibly seized.
    If the owner gave his consent the LEOs could legally check it with whatever tools they have, just like asking to search your car without a warrant.

    When I carry into a store that I might to go back to I try to get something in writing from their corporate offices regarding their OC policy. Here the e-mail I sent to Wal-Mart:

    Hello,
    I have a question about Wal-Mart's policy on openly carried firearms. In Wisconsin there is no legal method of concealed carry. However, open carry is perfectly legal. I would love to shop at Wal-Mart, but I also want to respect Wal-Mart's right to set whatever rules they want on their own property. Do you have a company-wide policy on openly carried firearms or is there a store-by-store policy that may be different at each Wal-Mart location? Thank you for your time and consideration

    Athena

    Here's the reply I got back:

    Dear Athena, There is no policy against customers carrying their handgun in our stores as long as he/she is legally licenced by their state to carry. As a private property owner, Wal-Mart has the authority and ability to ask customers to leave or to remove their handgun on case-by-case basis if it is causing any kind of a problem. Sincerely, Walmart Customer Care For further correspondence regarding this issue, please reply to this email.


    It sounds as if that particular store manager not only doesn't know what his company's policies are, but he told you that their corporate policy is the opposite of what it actually is.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Post imported post

    protias wrote:
    Walmart follows state laws, so it is legal to carry in Walmart.
    We have no written statement of this.

    We do have now four (Plover, Chilton, Mukwonago, Hartford) documented cases of Wal-Mart calling the police on patrons who carry. Just like hugh (Nik) asked people to boycott Marcus theater(s) I think it is high time we request boycotts of Wal-Mart NATION WIDE. Just check the threads of the other states, and you will see multiple instances of Wal-Mart's anti-rights policy.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Post imported post

    Athena wrote:
    If he removed your gun from your hands then it was impermissibly seized.
    If the owner gave his consent the LEOs could legally check it with whatever tools they have, just like asking to search your car without a warrant.

    When I carry into a store that I might to go back to I try to get something in writing from their corporate offices regarding their OC policy. Here the e-mail I sent to Wal-Mart:

    Hello,
    I have a question about Wal-Mart's policy on openly carried firearms. In Wisconsin there is no legal method of concealed carry. However, open carry is perfectly legal. I would love to shop at Wal-Mart, but I also want to respect Wal-Mart's right to set whatever rules they want on their own property. Do you have a company-wide policy on openly carried firearms or is there a store-by-store policy that may be different at each Wal-Mart location? Thank you for your time and consideration

    Athena

    Here's the reply I got back:

    Dear Athena, There is no policy against customers carrying their handgun in our stores as long as he/she is legally licenced by their state to carry. As a private property owner, Wal-Mart has the authority and ability to ask customers to leave or to remove their handgun on case-by-case basis if it is causing any kind of a problem. Sincerely, Walmart Customer Care For further correspondence regarding this issue, please reply to this email.


    It sounds as if that particular store manager not only doesn't know what his company's policies are, but he told you that their corporate policy is the opposite of what it actually is.
    That's more of a reply than I got. I think I will be calling their 800 customer service number next week and pressing for a resolution to this issue as it has now become a state wide problem.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Rbwhanson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Hartford, WI
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post

    So it seems as if I should have respectfully not given consent and plead the 5th on any questions. Then what do I do after/if I get arrested? I don't think they have internet access in jail to hop on to opencarry.org
    Member: Wisconsin Carry Inc.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    Rbwhanson wrote:
    So it seems as if I should have respectfully not given consent and plead the 5th on any questions. Then what do I do after/if I get arrested? I don't think they have internet access in jail to hop on to opencarry.org
    What to do after getting wrongfully arrested becuase not speaking to the police is not obstruction, and not consenting to an unwarranted search is also legal. You sign the recognizance bond or bond out with cash if required, and contact an attorney.

    If you were not driving the vehicle at the time of the stop, you have no legal obligation to give ID, or even say a single word to the police (read Terry V. Ohio)

    An anonymous tip or even a identified tip is not probable cause and therefore the police are limited to voluntary discussion on your behalf. I am not going to go into everything right now. I suggest you spend a little more time reading the WI and national threads and following a few links to relevant case-law and educate yourself toyour protectedrights so this sort of thing is not allowed to happen to you anymore.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sheboygan
    Posts
    72

    Post imported post

    i think that it is time that we make a mass call in to wal mart and let them know how we feel on this matter and let them know that we are willing to go to other stores if need be and ask how many times cops have been called on other people exercising civil liberties.

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Post imported post

    Rbwhanson wrote:
    So it seems as if I should have respectfully not given consent and plead the 5th on any questions. Then what do I do after/if I get arrested? I don't think they have internet access in jail to hop on to opencarry.org
    I cannot tell you what to do as each interaction is different. I have given ID when asked, but that is as far as it has ever gone. What I can say is it will take a warrant before they search my car/home and it will take an arrest before they get my firearm.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    The little rant I have below is not directed at the OP or is armchair quarter backing, Just a suggestion of what to not do, and what to not say if stopped by a store employee or police. Please feel free to add finer points I may have missed.

    It is not our duty or legal responsibility to call stores and ask permission to exercise our rights.
    If Wal-Mart employees continue to call the police for legal protected behavior, let them do it! the employees that are calling the police on people instead of asking an armed patron to leave the premisesare only hurting themselves.

    If you are contacted by a wal-mart employee and they ask you to leave the store, Do it immediatly with no questions asked or saying a single word! This is very important, because if you say anything that is considered argumentative, you could get cited for trespassing. Leave the full cart and immediately walk out the nearest exit!

    If contacted by the police due to a MWAG call, KNOW YOUR RIGHTS! And protect them from being abused or trampled. If you were not asked to leave by a wal-mart employee, there is nothing that can be done to you by the courts. You cannot be found responsible if you are charged with anything becuase you left immediatly after being asked to.

    Your dialogue with the police is you decision, you are not required to speak! and youcan not be held liable if you choose not to speak. non-compliance when asked questions is not disorderly or obstructing! You have the right to remain silent!! Use it!

    You are not required to show ID, you do not need to show the cops your gun, you do not need to answer any questions. I know some people feel the easy way out is by talking to the cops. But they are only collecting evidence to arrest and charge you with something.

    They will threaten you, they may arrest you, do not resist or argue. Never ever ever answer "Why do you have a gun" whatever you say will be twisted into something sumding much worse. The really sad part of all this? If your going to O-C, be prepared to be arrested. it shouldn;t be happening, but it is! It is a risk we need to be willing to take to secure our rights. No court in the state has found anyone guilty of breaking any laws when a person is legally armed! they have forced people to plea bargain, But I think those days are over.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Appleton, WI
    Posts
    276

    Post imported post

    i've heard of people answering the "why do you have a gun?" with "for any law-abiding reason"

    I think it would be very hard for me to not say anything and just stand there, even if its my right, i dont know if the awkward feeling would make me open my mouth :/

  16. #16
    Regular Member hardballer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    Posts
    925

    Post imported post

    Is there any kind of fund set up to help or support anyone illegally arrested?


    Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid. Han Solo

    http://buffaloholstercompany.blogspot.com/ Concealment holsters IWB, SOB, and belt slide. Open Carry too. New from Buffalo Holster, Women's holsters for concealment and or belt carry.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Many members have donated to individuals for their legal fees and then the person usually doesn't hire an attorney and fight the case.

    There are still members out there that will help if needed.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592

    Post imported post

    Nutczak wrote:
    You are not required to show ID, you do not need to show the cops your gun, you do not need to answer any questions. I know some people feel the easy way out is by talking to the cops. But they are only collecting evidence to arrest and charge you with something.
    I want to only slightly take issue with this, especially since not everyone reading this thread will be from Wisconsin.

    On the matter of ID, follow your state's law. In most places you are not required to show physical ID. There are some states, like Tennessee, that require a carrier to produce their permit upon demand. So, make sure you know what the law is in your state!

    While I'd rather not see anyone arrested, I would prefer someone to be arrested for a bogus Disorderly Conduct, Inducing a Panic, or Obstruction charge than for something more legitamate like failing to show ID that may be required by law.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Madison/The Northwoods, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    I think it would be very hard for me to not say anything and just stand there, even if its my right, i dont know if the awkward feeling would make me open my mouth :/
    It's way more awkward for the person doing the question-asking. If you must say something this is a good awkward pause filler: "I do not consent to any searches of my vehicle, firearm, or person without a warrant. I am exercising my right not to give you my identification, and have no further comments."
    Write something along those lines on a note card and carry it around with you if you get nervous (I do, I'm terribly stage fright).

    Asking if you are being arrested or detained right away is also helpful. If you are not you are free to go. If you stay you do so voluntarily, although you won't be informed that you have the right to leave.

  20. #20
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter bigtoe416's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,748

    Post imported post

    You should have locked and closed the car door/trunk as soon as you realized that the police officer was approaching you. Then you should have just stood there not saying anything. Then they would have had to leave or violate your rights.

    If they got a call that there was a man with a gun, then you fall under Florida v. JL, which says they cannot search you. By locking and sealing off the interior of the car, you have excluded it from your grabbable area, and have essentially made everything inside that car untouchable by the police. It sounds like Wisconsin doesn't have a stop and identify statute, so you can stand mute before the officers and they'll have to go on their way.

    If they search you for your keys then they violate Terry (only an exterior patdown for weapons if the officer has RAS) and Florida v. JL (an anonymous report of a MWAG doesn't constitute a search). If they take your keys and open your car they are now performing a warrantless search of your vehicle (I think there was a recent SCOTUS ruling on this too). If they find and unlock your gun case they are performing a warrantless search on top of a warrantless search. Then if they take your gun and run the serial number they are in violate of Arizona v. Hicks.

    Those three cases should be well known by any police officer, and by violating them they open themselves up to civil suits. Qualified immunity will not help them in this hypothetical situation because they absolutely should be aware of the rulings they are violating.

    Stay vigilant out there! Don't be afraid to assert your right to remain silent, and always try to keep things under lock and key when possible.

  21. #21
    Regular Member 1FASTC4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Tomahawk
    Posts
    510

    Post imported post

    bnhcomputing wrote:
    protias wrote:
    Walmart follows state laws, so it is legal to carry in Walmart.
    We have no written statement of this.

    We do have now four (Plover, Chilton, Mukwonago, Hartford) documented cases of Wal-Mart calling the police on patrons who carry. Just like hugh (Nik) asked people to boycott Marcus theater(s) I think it is high time we request boycotts of Wal-Mart NATION WIDE. Just check the threads of the other states, and you will see multiple instances of Wal-Mart's anti-rights policy.
    Well I can understand your position up there.. but I OC in Walmart regularly and never get a second glance.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    376

    Post imported post

    Ok, I am going to go into "blame the victim mode" and here is why: when you reinforce bad behavior you get....more bad behavior.

    I'm not referring to the OP, but to the cops. OP is reinforcing bad policing and shaking their hands and such. Seriously, this is not good. These guys are borderline infringing on your rights and you accept that and encourage that. The cops will walk away thinking what they did is acceptable and YOU are the reason the next OCer will get hassled. Please stop doing that.

    I'll go so far to say that if you don't know your rights and aren't willing to exercise them (ala don't talk to the cops and flex your rights videos) then quite frankly you shouldn't open carry as you are just making it harder for the rest of us.

    You can't be nice about this stuff. I'm not saying call the cop a MF'er but you need to aggressively defend your rights for your sake and everyone else. In Cali they are getting nervous about hassling Ocers due to the ever present lawsuit risk. THAT IS A GOOD THING.

    No recorder, weakness galore...not good. Granted, I know it is your first time and all, nowhere to go but up on the second occurrence, but this was NOT good and there is room for improvement. Just being candid.

    I keep them on the cart and he asks me for my ID, so I proceed to hand him my State ID after warning him it was in my back pocket.

    Weak.

    He states that he is not arresting me, but there was a complaint of me carrying in Walmart.

    Your first question should be if you are being detained. If not, then you should leave promptly.

    He then asks to see my firearm so that he can run it through the database. (Two more cops walk up).

    The answer to this question is always no.

    I let him know it is locked properly in my trunk. I get my keys and unlock the trunk (this is the point where the don't talk to cops video starts running through my head....a bit too late).

    More weakness and you know better since you saw the video. Close your trunk and forget how to speak English.

    I grab the case and hand it to another cop and state that the serial number is clearly marked on the outside, but that I will open it if necessary. They open it with my key and run it, of course it comes back legal.

    What is wrong with you. Why are you doing this?

    Then the officer proceeds to say that They are not arresting me although some cities such as Milwaukee are arresting.

    Blah, blah am I free to go?

    I ask what for, and he states Disorderly Conduct. He asks if I have ran into trouble carrying anywhere else and I state that I have not. He asks that I do not carry again in Walmart.


    I'd tell him that I will do what Walmart allows and he is in no position to stop that. You are talking too much at this point.

    I then ask how it is considered disorderly conduct. He gives me some run down about yelling fire at a movie theater. I tell him that I have already emailed the Senator in regards to the disorderly conduct law. I tell him currently the disorderly conduct law is wrong and should e changed and give him my own analogy of the law. I tell him technically the way you are telling me "If I was walking down the street with my dog on a leash and a neighbor can call me in if they don't like it, and I can be arrested for walking a dog". He says "Right" He says just because that the Attorney Generals interpretation of it does not make it law. He said that this will have to be answered at a Supreme court level as it probably will. He asks me for my phone number, and I oblige.

    Ok, again, what is wrong with you? You are swapping phone numbers with this guy?


    He then asks me if I have anymore questions. I state "No" shake his hand and thank him for his time.

    WTF is with the hand shaking? This guy is not your friend. You need to understand that.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    hardballer wrote:
    Is there any kind of fund set up to help or support anyone illegally arrested?
    There is no entity, individual or enterprise, trusted to receive funds and make decisions because we have been so well taught by the government (tax abuse) and their statist clients (NGOs like NRA).

    Who do you trust? First, I DO NOT trust Anony Mouse the keyboard cowboi that will not use his name and claims to be a swinging NRA 'member'.

    The most likely candidate for trust is an attorney that is bound by his canons of ethics.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    968.24 Temporary questioning without arrest.

    After having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer,
    a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for
    a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects
    that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed
    a crime, and may demand the name and address of the person
    and an explanation of the person’s conduct. Such detention
    and temporary questioning shall be conducted in the vicinity
    where the person was stopped.
    History: 1993 a. 486.

    Suspicious behavior of a driver and passenger justified detention. State v. Goebel,
    103 Wis. 2d 203, 307 N.W.2d 915 (1981).

    A defendant’s flight from a police officer may, using the totality of circumstances
    test, justify a warrantless investigatory stop. State v. Jackson, 147 Wis. 2d 824, 434
    N.W.2d 386 (1989).

    Actions suggesting to a reasonable police officer that an individual is attempting
    to flee is adequately suspicious to support an investigatory stop. State v. Anderson,
    155 Wis. 2d 77, 454 N.W.2d 763 (1990).

    The Terry rule applies once a person becomes a valid suspect even though the
    encounter was initially consensual; if circumstances show investigation is not complete, the suspect does not have the right to terminate it.
    State v. Goyer, 157 Wis. 2d 532, 460 N.W.2d 424 (Ct. App. 1990).

    When a person’s activity may constitute either a civil forfeiture or crime, an investigative stop may be performed. State v. Krier, 165 Wis. 2d 673, 478 N.W.2d 63 (Ct. App. 1991).

    A “showup” where police present a single suspect to a witness for identification,
    often at or near a crime scene shortly after the crime occurs, is suggestive but not
    impermissibly suggestive per se. State v. Garner, 207 Wis. 2d 520, 558 N.W.2d 916
    (Ct. App. 1996), 96−0168.

    Detaining a person at his home, then transporting him about one mile to the scene
    of an accident in which he was involved, was an investigative stop and a reasonable
    part of an ongoing accident investigation. State v. Quartana, 213 Wis. 2d 440, 570
    N.W.2d 618 (Ct. App. 1997), 97−0695.

    That the defendant is detained in a temporary Terry stop does not automatically
    mean Miranda warnings are not required. Whether the warnings are required
    depends on whether a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have considered himself or herself to be in custody.
    State v. Gruen, 218 Wis. 2d 581, 582
    N.W.2d 728 (Ct. App. 1998), 96−2588.

    This section authorizes officers to demand identification only when a person is suspected of committing a crime, but does not govern the lawfulness of requests for identification in other circumstances. State v. Griffith, 2000 WI 72, 236 Wis. 2d 48, 613 N.W.2d 72, 98−0931.

    A police officer performing a Terry stop and requesting identification could perform
    a limited search for identifying papers when: 1) the information received by the
    officer was not confirmed by police records; 2) the intrusion on the suspect was minimal; 3) the officer observed that the suspect’s pockets were bulging; and 4) the officer had experience with persons who claimed to have no identification when in fact they did. State v. Black, 2000 WI App 175, 238 Wis. 2d 203, 617 N.W.2d 210, 99−1686

    Under Florida v. J.L, an anonymous tip giving rise to reasonable suspicion must
    bear indicia of reliability.
    That the tipster’s anonymity is placed at risk indicates that
    the informant is genuinely concerned and not a fallacious prankster. Corroborated
    aspects of the tip also lend credibility; the corroborated actions of the suspect need
    be inherently criminal in and of themselves. State v. Williams, 2001 WI 21, 241 Wis.
    2d 631, 623 N.W.2d 106, 96−1821.

    An anonymous tip regarding erratic driving from another driver calling from a cell
    phone contained sufficient indicia of reliability to justify an investigative stop when:
    1) the informant was exposed to possible identification, and therefore possible arrest if the tip proved false; 2) the tip reported contemporaneous and verifiable observations regarding the driving, location, and vehicle; and 3) the officer verified many of the details in the tip. That the tip reasonably suggested intoxicated driving created an exigency strongly in favor of immediate police investigation without the necessity that the officer personally observe erratic driving. State v. Rutzinski, 2001 WI 22, 241 Wis. 2d 729, 623 N.W.2d 516, 98−3541.

    When a caller identifies himself or herself by name, placing his or her anonymity
    at risk, and the totality of the circumstances establishes a reasonable suspicion that
    criminal activity may be afoot, the police may execute a lawful investigative stop.
    Whether the caller gave correct identifying information, or whether the police ultimately could have verified the information, the caller, by providing the information,
    risked that his or her identity would be discovered and cannot be considered anonymous. State v. Sisk, 2001 WI App 182, 247 Wis. 2d 443, 634 N.W.2d 877, 00−2614.

    It was reasonable to conduct a Terry search of a person who knocked on the door
    of a house while it was being searched for drugs pursuant to a warrant. State v. Kolp, 2002 WI App 17, 250 Wis. 2d 296, 640 N.W.2d 551, 01−0549.

    Terry and this section apply to confrontations between the police and citizens in
    public places only. For private residences and hotels, in the absence of a warrant, the police must have probable cause and exigent circumstances or consent to justify an entry. Reasonable suspicion is not a prerequisite to an officer’s seeking consent to enter a private dwelling.
    State v. Stout, 2002 WI App 41, 250 Wis. 2d 768, 641 N.W.2d 474, 01−0904.

    To perform a protective search for weapons, an officer must have reasonable suspicion that a person may be armed and dangerous. A court may consider an officer’s belief that his, her, or another’s safety is threatened in finding reasonable suspicion, but such a belief is not a prerequisite to a valid search. There is no per se rule justifying a search any time an individual places his or her hands in his or her pockets contrary to police orders. The defendant’s hand movements must be considered under the totality of the circumstances of the case. State v. Kyles, 2004 WI 15, 269 Wis. 2d 1, 675 N.W.2d 449, 02−1540.

    The principles of Terry permit a state to require a suspect to disclose his or her name in the course of a Terry stop and allow imposing criminal penalties for failing to do so. Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humboldt County, 542 U.S. 177, 159 L. Ed 2d 292, 124 S. Ct. 2451 (2004).

    When the defendant’s refusal to disclose his name was not based on any articulated
    real and appreciable fear that his name would be used to incriminate him, or that it
    would furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed to prosecute him, application of
    a criminal statute requiring disclosure of the person’s name when the police officer
    reasonably suspected the person had committed a crime did not violate the protection against self−incrimination. Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, Humboldt County, 542 U.S. 177, 159 L. Ed 2d 292, 124 S. Ct. 2451 (2004).

    Weaving within a single traffic lane does not alone give rise to the reasonable suspicion necessary to conduct an investigative stop of a vehicle. The reasonableness of a stop must be determined based on the totality of the facts and circumstances. State v. Post, 2007 WI 60, 301 Wis. 2d 1, 733 N.W.2d 634, 05−2778.

    Cell Phone Tips of Crime and ‘Reasonable Suspicion.’ Andregg. Wis. Law. June
    2005.

    NOTE: See also the notes to Article I, section 11, to the Wisconsin Constitution.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Rbwhanson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Hartford, WI
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post

    Looking back and reading more of these posts (Thanks for all the replies) I see now that I am not near informed as I thought I was. I spent a solid week reading posts here before deciding to start OC'ing. It's clear I need to spend some more time reading and researching. I also need to carry a copy of a few laws/statutes in my pocket as a quick reference. I have seen all suggested videos but I do not know Wisconsin law well enough yet. I need to read up more before I go out again so that this time I can be prepared. Thank you for that last post, that was a huge step in the right direction of my reading. Anyone have a school zone map for Hartford? Small city, if not I can create my own. Thanks again all, it has been a VERY informative 24 hours...next time I go out the Officer will be heart pressed to get anything out of me aside from "Am I being detained?" and going from that to "In your words I am not being detained and I am not under arrest, as such I am free to go, have a nice day" or "I do not consent to any search of my car, my firearm, or my person. I am exercising my right to remain silent and I have no further comments."


    I suppose that is a good start...
    Member: Wisconsin Carry Inc.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •