County of Waukesha v. Donald Simon Mullen, 2019AP001188

At ~1:20 a.m. Mullen entered the (closed) bar parking lot and exited his vehicle; Deputy Ollinger made U‑turns, parked a marked squad car slightly behind and left of Mullen’s vehicle, and radioed dispatch he would "be out with an individual."
Ollinger activated a high‑intensity spotlight that illuminated Mullen; bar lighting also illuminated the area.
Ollinger, in uniform with his firearm visible, approached and identified himself; Mullen stood by the bar, slurring, repeatedly stating he would not drive and would get an Uber, and smelled of intoxicants.
Ollinger asked Mullen to perform field sobriety tests; Mullen began one, lost balance, then refused further testing.
Mullen was arrested for OWI and cited for refusal; he moved to suppress evidence arguing he was seized when Ollinger approached and shined the spotlight. The circuit court denied suppression; the court later convicted Mullen and he appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Mullen was "seized" when Ollinger parked behind him, shined the spotlight, and approached	The spotlight, marked car, uniform, visible firearm, late hour, and isolation meant a reasonable person would not feel free to leave	The contact was a consensual approach; no forceful commands, no blocking of the vehicle, and nothing objectively indicating compulsion	No seizure at initial approach; encounter was consensual until field sobriety tests were requested
Whether the use of a high‑intensity spotlight alone converts a consensual encounter into a seizure	Spotlight was disabling and unnecessary; it coerced compliance and thus effected a seizure	Spotlight is a routine, safety‑oriented tool and, without other coercive measures, is not a show of authority sufficient to detain	Spotlight use, without other coercive circumstances (e.g., blocking vehicle, commands, multiple officers, weapons displayed), did not amount to a seizure

County of Grant v. Vogt, 356 Wis. 2d 343 (officer approach to parked vehicle was consensual; no seizure)
State v. Young, 294 Wis. 2d 1 (spotlight use not necessarily a show of authority; totality of circumstances controls)
Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (consensual encounters do not require reasonable suspicion)
United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (seizure occurs if a reasonable person would not feel free to leave)
United States v. Drayton, 536 U.S. 194 (officers may approach and question without transforming encounter into seizure)
State v. Baker, 107 P.3d 1214 (spotlight use alone insufficient to constitute seizure; safety rationale)