831 N.W.2d 778
Wis. Ct. App.2013Background
- Maddix was convicted of manufacturing THC under Wis. Stat. § 961.41(1)(h)1 (2011-12).
- Maddix challenged the circuit court’s denial of a suppression motion seeking to exclude evidence from a warrantless apartment search.
- Officers responded at about 1:55 a.m. to a domestic disturbance and entered through the back door after hearing screams.
- Upon entry, Maddix and his girlfriend were present; officers conducted separate interviews.
- A protective sweep of the apartment followed the interviews to check for other occupants or threats.
- The closet in an overlooked bedroom yielded six marijuana plants after Maddix allegedly consented to a check.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the community caretaker exception justifies the warrantless search | Maddix | State | No; no objectively reasonable basis supported a caretaker need. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pinkard v. State, 327 Wis.2d 346 (2010) (needed to assess bona fide caretaker function; door open and danger evident in close case)
- Horngren, 238 Wis.2d 347 (2000) (warns that care-taking must be reasonable in context of a home)
- Ultsch, 331 Wis.2d 242 (2011) (no reasonable basis to believe someone needs assistance; car crash analogy limited)
- Gracia, 345 Wis.2d 488 (2003) (officers reasonably believed occupant needed assistance after vehicle crash; subjective intent relevant)
- Kramer, 315 Wis.2d 414 (2009) (three-part test for community caretaker function (search, bona fide caretaker, balance of interests))
- Leutenegger, 275 Wis.2d 512 (2004) (establishes framework for evaluating warrantless home entries)