STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. BRINKLEY L. BRIDGES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT., 2018 WI App 66

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-Counsel was not ineffective in failing to argue that the search warrant affidavit contained no statement showing personal knowledge that defendant used his phone to conduct illegal drug transactions. The facts in the affidavit were clearly sufficient to support probable cause under Wis. Stat. § 968.373(3)(e) (2015-2016) since the affiant was not required to personally witness the phone being used in selling drugs; [2]-Counsel was not ineffective in failing to argue that all the evidence obtained as a result of the search warrant was tainted because the warrant-issuing magistrate had a substantial basis to conclude that the probable cause existed since there was a fair probability that the informant was reliable and that defendant's phone would reveal evidence of the drug transactions since the affiant specifically corroborated all of the alleged facts independently.