Court Opinion

ID: 9709973
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 03:58:49.689684+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:53.160397
License: Public Domain

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J.,
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). The majority holds that Koch's constitutional rights were violated when the state held him in jail for approximately 92 hours without a probable cause determination. I agree. Yet the majority opinion does not provide Koch with any recourse for the violation of his constitutional rights. The result is to "grant the right but in reality to withhold its privilege and enjoyment." Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 656 (1961).
*712The Wisconsin Constitution recognizes that rights are meaningless when unaccompanied by remedies for their enforcement. Article I, sec. 9, of the Wisconsin Constitution provides that there shall be a certain remedy for all wrongs to the person.1 In Interest of E.C., 130 Wis. 2d 376, 389, 387 N.W.2d 72 (1986).
I am not necessarily urging the suppression of all evidence acquired during the time Koch was held, as he advocates.2 Nonetheless, I believe that this court has a duty to craft a remedy to redress the violation of a person's constitutional rights and to deter the state from violating the rights of persons arrested in the future. If no remedy is provided a constitutional right becomes an empty promise.

 Every person is entitled to a certain remedy in the law for all injuries, or wrongs which he may receive in his person, property or character . . .. conformably to the laws.
Similar provisions appear in the constitutions of 39 states. David Schuman, The Right to a Remedy, 69 Temple L. Rev. 1197, 1220 (1992).

 For discussions of suppression of evidence for violation of Gerstein-Riverside, see 2 LaFave, Search and Seizure sec. 5.1(f), p. 425 (2d ed. 1987), 1993 Supp. p. 106; Thomas, The Poisoned Fruit of Pretrial Detention, 61 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 413, 461 (1986).