Supreme Court Finds Probable Cause When Driver Was Found at His Driveway

In State v. Green, a defendant was appealing his conviction for operating a vehicle with a prohibited alcohol content. He had argued that the warrant that allowed police to draw blood lacked probable cause. The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the warrant was valid and upheld Green’s conviction. 

In this case, the officer filled out a pre-printed form and made his own handwritten additions. He noted that Green was operating a vehicle in the driveway of his home. The officer also described Green’s state when he was found, with a strong odor of intoxicants and pink and glassy eyes. The warrant was issued, and the subsequent blood test found that Green had a blood alcohol content well above the legal limit. 

In Green’s appeal, he did not dispute any of the evidence about his state at the time of his arrest. Instead, he focused on the part of the warrant that described him as operating his car on the driveway. Under Wisconsin law, a defendant can only be convicted of OWI or PAC when they are driving on a public highway. According to Green, the fact that he was on his driveway means that he did not break the law.

The Supreme Court Implied that Green Was On a Public Road 

The Supreme Court held that the fact that Green was on his driveway at the time of his arrest did not mean that he did not break the law. Here, the warrant said that Green was driving “at” his driveway. It did not imply that he was driving only on his driveway. In addition, there were civilian witnesses who saw Green drive his vehicle elsewhere. In other words, there was more than one source of evidence that supported probable cause. There was a reasonable inference that Green was driving on the road at some point when he was intoxicated. Thus, the warrant court made a reasonable finding in granting the warrant for blood to be drawn.

Warrants Will Be Very Closely Scrutinized 

One of the main takeaways from Green is that a court will actually look very closely at the actual language of the warrant in determining whether there is probable cause. It is far from automatic that a court will just agree with the officer and the warrant court. Although the court would look at all of the surrounding circumstances, an error on the actual warrant could be fatal to the prosecutor’s case against the defendant. You should always hire an attorney who could carefully scrutinize the evidence being used against you and potentially argue that it was seized in violation of your Fourth Amendment rights.

Contact an Eau Claire OWI Defense Lawyer Today 

If you have been charged with OWI, your conviction is not a foregone conclusion. An experienced attorney may be able to find defenses that you can use to fight the charges. Call the Cohen Law Offices at (715) 514-5051 or message us online for a free initial consultation.