Article author:
Associated Press
Harm Venhuizen
Madison, Wisconsin (AP) — Thursday's Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds conviction of a Milwaukee man arrested by police in response to a report did. From the shooting position technique, the policeman was found to have had reasonable suspicion not only for the shooting technique but also for stopping him.
Court unanimously sentenced Avan Rondell Nimmer, who was detained by police in 2019, after police observed police walking about 100 feet from the ShotSpotter report site near Milwaukee's home. I gave it.
Nimmer argued that there was no reason for the police to stop him, and ShotSpotter detected a gunshot, but did not identify the shooter and was looking for his girlfriend. Claimed it was.
The State Court of Appeals agreed with him, but the Supreme Court overturned the ruling. Judge Rebecca Bradley said the police were prima facie detaining Nimmer because ShotSpotter seemed to be credible and the technique was in the area minutes after detecting the shooting and seemed to hide his weapons. I wrote to the majority that I had a suspicion.
Nimmer's attorney for appeal, Mark Rozen, disagreed with this decision.
"I think they made a mistake, so I'll leave it alone," he said.
The use of ShotSpotter technology in policing has been attacked as problematic and potentially misleading. ShotSpotter, a network of surveillance microphones used to detect gunshots, uses an algorithm protected by the author as a trade secret. An AP investigation earlier this year identified a significant flaw in using ShotSpotter as evidence support for prosecutors.
According to AP research, the system could miss live gunshots beneath the microphone or misclassify fireworks or car backfire sounds as gunshots. I have. Forensic reports produced by ShotSpotter employees are used in court to improperly claim that the defendant fired at the police and to provide a suspicious count of the number of shots the defendant allegedly fired. .. In many cases, the judge discarded the evidence.
When a Milwaukee officer responded to a warning outside Nimmer's residence in June 2019, court records show that visibility was less than a minute after four gunshots were reported. Only Nimmer was there.
Officers approached Nimmer after noticing that he was walking away from their police car soon. In response to their approach, Nimmer reached to his left and moved his body away from the officer.
One of the arrested police officers testified that he believed that Nimmer's actions suggested that he was hiding his weapons.
When I stopped Nimmer and searched, he revealed to the police that he was pushing his pistol into his waistband, saying, "The gun is in my waistline, my companion." Nimmer was banned from possessing a gun due to a previous felony conviction that he possessed THC with the intention of delivering him.
Nimmer said in court that he was on the street looking for a girlfriend who had left home just before he heard a gunshot outside.
His lawyer tried to suppress the evidence of the pistol, and police officers claimed that there was no reasonable suspicion or possible reason to stop and search for Nimmer. The motion was dismissed and Nimmer was sentenced to two years in prison and two years of extended supervision for possessing a felony firearm.
The court ruled that timing was the key to prima facie suspicion of officers and said, "People encountered within a minute or two of receiving an alert. Should have been investigated by anyone, with a few blocks of allegedly shot shots. "
The Wisconsin State Court of Appeals said in areas where criminal activity was not sufficient to detain him. He overturned the court's decision, citing several cases as a precedent for their views on the existence of Nimmer. The Court of Appeals also ruled that Nimmer's actions on the ground were not sufficient for prima facie prima facie.
Judge Rebecca Durley, with the addition of two other judges, agreed that police had prima facie suspicion of stopping Nimmer, but the majority opinion was from Shotspotter. He claimed to be overly dependent on the warning.
"No matter how accurate the ShotSpotter is or how quickly police respond to ShotSpotter alerts, the unjustified search of everyone found by police near the recently reported gunshots. It cannot be used as a dragnet to justify, "Dallet wrote.
-
Harm Venhuizen is a corps member of the Associated Press / Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a non-profit national service program that places journalists in the local newsroom to report on unreported issues. Follow Harm on Twitter.
