State v. Quartana, No. 97-0695

CourtCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin
Writing for the CourtBROWN
Citation213 Wis.2d 440,570 N.W.2d 618
Decision Date24 September 1997
Docket NumberNo. 97-0695
PartiesSTATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Theodore A. QUARTANA, Defendant-Appellant. d

Page 618

570 N.W.2d 618
213 Wis.2d 440
STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Theodore A. QUARTANA, Defendant-Appellant. d
No. 97-0695.
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.
Submitted on Briefs June 17, 1997.
Opinion Released Sept. 24, 1997.
Opinion Filed Sept. 24, 1997.

Page 620

[213 Wis.2d 443] On behalf of the defendant-appellant, the cause was submitted on the brief of Donald L. Conner II of Kingstad Law Offices, S.C. of Franklin.

On behalf of the plaintiff-respondent, the cause was submitted on the brief of Michele W. Hulgaard of Waukesha.

On behalf of the Wisconsin Department of Justice, there was a brief filed by James E. Doyle, Attorney General, and Daniel J. O'Brien, Assistant Attorney General.

Before BROWN, NETTESHEIM and ANDERSON, JJ.

BROWN, Judge.

Section 968.24, STATS., our codification of the Terry 1 stop, allows the detention and temporary questioning of a suspect without arrest for investigative purposes. The last sentence of the statute says: "Such detention and temporary questioning shall be conducted in the vicinity where the person was stopped." In this case involving an investigation of a one-car accident, Theodore A. Quartana was initially questioned at his home and was then transported by police to the accident scene. Quartana argues that this police action violates § 968.24. Therefore, his refusal to take a chemical test following an arrest for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated cannot be held to be improper. By this opinion, we determine the analysis to be conducted when a person under a Terry investigation is removed from one place to another and ultimately affirm the trial court's determination that Quartana improperly refused to take the test.

Sometime after 2:00 a.m. on January 7, 1996, Quartana lost control of his car and drove into a ditch. Immediately afterwards, Quartana left the accident [213 Wis.2d 444] scene and walked home to his parents' house, approximately one mile away.

A Wisconsin State Patrol trooper arrived first on the scene of the accident and took control as the investigating officer. After determining that Quartana owned the car and lived nearby, a city of Brookfield Police officer was dispatched to Quartana's residence.

The officer found Quartana at home and asked to see his driver's license and asked him about the accident. Quartana admitted he had been driving at the time of the accident. At this point, the officer observed that Quartana's eyes were "sort of" bloodshot and glassy and that his breath smelled of intoxicants. When the officer informed Quartana that he would have to return to the accident scene to talk with the trooper investigating the accident, Quartana asked if he could ride with his parents. The officer testified that he told Quartana "he would have to come with [him], because [he] needed to keep an observation on him, and that he was temporarily being detained in reference to the accident investigation." The officer kept Quartana's driver's license and drove him in the rear of the squad car to the accident scene.

At the accident scene, the officer turned Quartana and his driver's license over to the trooper. The trooper immediately interviewed Quartana and then had him perform several field sobriety tests. Quartana failed all of the tests and afterwards refused to take a preliminary breathalyzer test. The trooper then placed him under arrest and took him to the police station for further testing. At the station, the trooper read Quartana the Informing the Accused form, but Quartana refused to submit to any chemical testing.

At the refusal hearing, Quartana challenged the refusal by arguing that he had been placed under [213 Wis.2d 445] arrest without probable cause when the officer kept his driver's license and transported him against his will from his residence to the accident scene. Therefore, the request to submit to chemical testing came after he had been arrested without probable cause in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. The trial court found that although the officer did not have probable cause to arrest Quartana, he acted

Page 621

within the scope of a temporary investigative detention when he transported Quartana to the accident scene. Quartana appeals.

Because we assume without deciding that there was no probable cause to arrest, the officer's temporary investigative stop of Quartana was a "seizure" subject to Fourth Amendment protection. It is the State which bears the burden of proving that a warrantless search or seizure was reasonable and in conformity with the Fourth Amendment. See State v. Washington, 134 Wis.2d 108, 120, 396 N.W.2d 156, 161 (1986). Whether the facts as found by the trial court satisfy the constitutional requirement of reasonableness is a question of law we review independently of the trial court. See State v. Waldner, 206 Wis.2d 51, 54, 556 N.W.2d 681, 683 (1996).

Pursuant to Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 22, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 1880, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968), a police officer may, in the appropriate circumstances, detain a person for purposes of investigating possible criminal behavior even though there is no probable cause to make an arrest. Our legislature codified the constitutional standard established in Terry in § 968.24, STATS., cited below. 2 When interpreting the [213 Wis.2d 446] scope of § 968.24, we must resort to Terry and its progeny. See State v. Jackson, 147 Wis.2d 824, 830-31, 434 N.W.2d 386, 389 (1989).

During the course of a Terry stop, officers may try to obtain information confirming or dispelling their suspicions. See Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420, 439, 104 S.Ct. 3138, 3150, 82 L.Ed.2d 317 (1984). By its express language, § 968.24, STATS., authorizes the police to move a suspect short distances during the course of a temporary investigation. The statute states that the police may temporarily detain and question an individual "in the vicinity where the person was stopped." See id. Therefore, it is clear that the law permits the police, if they have reasonable grounds for doing so, to move a suspect in the general vicinity of the stop...

To continue reading

Request your trial
37 practice notes
  • State v. Blatterman, No. 2013AP2107–CR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • May 5, 2015
    ...within the vicinity under State v. Quartana, and whether Nisius's purpose in transporting Blatterman was reasonable. State v. Quartana, 213 Wis.2d 440, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct.App.1997). The court concluded ten miles was within the vicinity. See id. at 446–47, 570 N.W.2d 618. As for reasonable s......
  • State v. Pickens, No. 2008AP1514-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • December 23, 2009
    ...that a temporary detention was reasonable. Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 500, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983); State v. Quartana, 213 Wis.2d 440, 445, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct.App.1997). Such a detention requires a reasonable suspicion, grounded in "specific and articulable facts," and re......
  • State v. Marten-Hoye, No. 2006AP1104-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • January 24, 2008
    ...that he or she was under arrest. She points to State v. Vorburger, 2002 WI 105, 255 Wis.2d 537, 648 N.W.2d 829, and State v. Quartana, 213 Wis.2d 440, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct.App.1997), as examples of situations where police restrained defendants to a greater degree than present 746 N.W.2d 504 h......
  • State v. Morgan, No. 01-2148-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • April 4, 2002
    ...United States v. Corral-Franco, 848 F.2d 536, 540 (5th Cir. 1988). Then, relying on Swanson, 164 Wis. 2d at 449, and State v. Quartana, 213 Wis. 2d 440, 450-51, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct. App. 1997), the State argues that Morgan was not in custody because a reasonable innocent person in his situat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
37 cases
  • State v. Blatterman, No. 2013AP2107–CR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • May 5, 2015
    ...within the vicinity under State v. Quartana, and whether Nisius's purpose in transporting Blatterman was reasonable. State v. Quartana, 213 Wis.2d 440, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct.App.1997). The court concluded ten miles was within the vicinity. See id. at 446–47, 570 N.W.2d 618. As for reasonable s......
  • State v. Pickens, No. 2008AP1514-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • December 23, 2009
    ...that a temporary detention was reasonable. Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 500, 103 S.Ct. 1319, 75 L.Ed.2d 229 (1983); State v. Quartana, 213 Wis.2d 440, 445, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct.App.1997). Such a detention requires a reasonable suspicion, grounded in "specific and articulable facts," and re......
  • State v. Marten-Hoye, No. 2006AP1104-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • January 24, 2008
    ...that he or she was under arrest. She points to State v. Vorburger, 2002 WI 105, 255 Wis.2d 537, 648 N.W.2d 829, and State v. Quartana, 213 Wis.2d 440, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct.App.1997), as examples of situations where police restrained defendants to a greater degree than present 746 N.W.2d 504 h......
  • State v. Morgan, No. 01-2148-CR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
    • April 4, 2002
    ...United States v. Corral-Franco, 848 F.2d 536, 540 (5th Cir. 1988). Then, relying on Swanson, 164 Wis. 2d at 449, and State v. Quartana, 213 Wis. 2d 440, 450-51, 570 N.W.2d 618 (Ct. App. 1997), the State argues that Morgan was not in custody because a reasonable innocent person in his situat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT