State v. Gary Monroe Scull

Summary

The Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals' decision upholding the denial of Gary Monroe Scull's motion to suppress evidence seized from his home. The court held that, although a warrantless drug-detection dog sniff at the entrance to the home violated the Fourth Amendment under Florida v. Jardines, the good-faith exception applied because officers reasonably relied on a search warrant issued after a significant investigation and review by a knowledgeable government attorney. The court therefore concluded that the seized evidence was admissible.

Holdings

1. The good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies to evidence obtained in objectively reasonable reliance on a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate, even when the warrant is ultimately found to be defective.
2. The State established that the warrant was preceded by a substantial investigation and that the supporting affidavit was reviewed by a knowledgeable government attorney.
3. The evidence seized from Scull's home should not be suppressed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether evidence obtained under a search warrant must be suppressed when the warrant affidavit relied in part on a warrantless dog sniff of the defendant's home that violated the Fourth Amendment.
2. Whether Wisconsin's good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule applies when officers objectively relied on a search warrant issued by a detached and neutral magistrate.
3. Whether the warrant application satisfied Wisconsin's additional Eason requirements of a substantial investigation and review by a knowledgeable police officer or government attorney.

Disposition

affirmed