¶1(concurring). I agree with the majority that the playing of the tape was reasonable under the inventory exception to the warrant requirement. Majority op. at 137. This was an inadvertent discovery during the course of what the record clearly reveals was an inventory search. The dissent erroneously asserts that "the record is clear that the law *146enforcement officers were conducting not an inventory search but a search for specific items named in the search warrant." Id. Dissenting op. at 148 (Abrahamson, J., dissenting). Contrary to the dissent's assertion, the record establishes that the officers were removing all items from Weber's vehicle and logging each of them for inventory purposes on the warrant return.
163 Wis. 2d 116
471 N.W.2d 187
State v. Weber
Decided June 25, 1991
Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1991-06-25
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1991-06-25
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably 162 Wis. 2d 883 - State v. Martin (1991), 210 Wis. 2d 597 - State v. Caban (1997)
1 federal appellate · 27 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →