Huling moved to suppress the blood test results and other evidence. The trial court found that Hodges had probable cause to arrest Huling and denied the motion. Huling was subsequently convicted of operating a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants. She contends that the officer never saw any signs of intoxication nor did he have any information from other sources that her driving was impaired. Whether the facts of a given case constitute probable cause to arrest is a question of law that we decide without deference to the trial court.
Probable cause is a common-sense determination.
It is judged by the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable people, not legal technicians, act. Probable cause to arrest refers to the quantum of evidence which would lead a reasonable police officer to believe that the defendant probably committed a crime. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt need not be established nor does it need to be more likely than not that the defendant committed a crime. All that is required is reasonably trustworthy information that is sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution in the belief that a crime has been committed. 50 Wis.2d at 625.