COURT TOSSES POT CONVICTION BECAUSE POLICE HAD NO WARRANT

Jeffry Paterson's neighbor thought something was fishy when he saw lights
going on and off successively in upstairs rooms of Paterson's rural home,
so he tried unsuccessfully to telephone Paterson and then called police.

Three town of Burlington officers quickly arrived to find nothing amiss on
the November evening in 1996. There were lights on, a pickup in the open
garage and no signs of a break-in.

But, after another phone call wasn't answered, the police entered the house
anyway.

Chief Michael Mehring and an officer opened an unlocked door, walked in
and. said, "Is anyone home? This is the Police Depart-ment"

When they got no response, they decided to search and had looked through
three rooms before they spotted marijuana plants hanging on strings, and
then a 9-year-old girl at the top of the stairs.

About 15 minutes later, the girl's mom, Angela Pischke, arrived and told
police that her boyfriend, Paterson, was hunting nearby. Paterson, 40, was
convicted of growing marijuana and possessing pipe bombs and sentenced to
four years in prison.

But the 2nd District Court of Appeals on Wednesday threw out the
convictions, saying police violated the Fourth Amendment in entering the
home without a warrant and no good reason to search.

The court rejected the argument of Assistant Attorney General Leonard
Martin, who said police were just doing their job in check-ing out a
possible burglary.

The court, in overruling Racine County Circuit Judge Gerald Ptacek, said
lights going on and off and an unanswered phone at 5:30 p.m. aren't signs
of criminal activity.

"A more reasonable deduction is that a person legitimately on the premises
was simply moving from room to room," Judge Neal Nettesheim wrote for the
court'.

"A person legitimately in the residence may be preoccupied or otherwise
simply choose to not answer a call," he added, "Or, if a child is home
alone, the child may have been instructed to not answer the telephone.

"In short, the information provided by the neighbor did not present an
overly worrisome situation."

Checked-by: Mike Gogulski