State v. Michael R. Tullberg
2014 WI 134
Wis.2014Background
- Tullberg was involved in a fatal single-vehicle accident in Shawano County and disputed that he was the driver.
- While at Langlade Memorial Hospital, a deputy directed a warrantless blood draw of Tullberg without a warrant.
- State alleged the blood draw was justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances; good faith was argued but not essential.
- Deputy Hoffman observed signs of intoxication and concluded Tullberg operated the vehicle while intoxicated based on interview and scene evidence.
- Blood was drawn at 3:05 a.m., more than two and a half hours after the crash, yielding a BAC of 0.141.
- Circuit court denied the suppression motion; Tullberg was convicted on six counts and later sought post-conviction relief, with appellate review occurring before McNeely was decided.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Probable cause to search blood draw | Tullberg argues no probable cause to obtain blood; blood draw unlawful | Tullberg contends probable cause and exigent circumstances justified draw | Probable cause existed to believe blood would show intoxication |
| Exigent circumstances supporting warrantless draw | Exigency not shown; delay permissible for warrant | Totality of circumstances showed exigency to prevent dissipation | Exigent circumstances justified warrantless blood draw |
| Arrest prerequisite for warrantless blood draw | Arrest required before blood draw | Arrest not required; exigency and probable cause suffice | Arrest not required for warrantless blood draw justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances |
| McNeely framework and dissipation of alcohol | McNeely restricts warrantless draws; dissipation alone is not enough | McNeely allows warrantless draws under totality of circumstances | Totality of circumstances supported exigency; McNeely applied with nuanced consideration |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Robinson, 327 Wis. 2d 302 (Wis. 2010) (constitutional fact review; two-step inquiry for suppression orders)
- McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (U.S. 2013) (dissipation of alcohol informs exigency; no per se rule)
- State v. Erickson, 260 Wis. 2d 279 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003) (blood draw permitted with probable cause and exigency if nonconsensual)
- State v. Seibel, 471 N.W.2d 226 (Wis. 1991) (probable cause framework; distinguishing reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Swanson, 475 N.W.2d 148 (Wis. 1991) (limits of probable cause vs. reasonable suspicion; context of arrest/search)