Wis. Stat. » CHAPTER 345 — VEHICLES — CIVIL AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 345.421 (2026)

Discovery

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
345.421345.421 Discovery. Neither party is entitled to pretrial discovery except that if the defendant moves within 10 days after the alleged violation and shows cause therefor, the court may order that the defendant be allowed to inspect and test under s. 804.09 and under such conditions as the court prescribes, any devices used by the plaintiff to determine whether a violation has been committed, including without limitation, devices used to determine presence of alcohol in breath or body fluid or to measure speed, and may inspect under s. 804.09 the reports of experts relating to those devices.
345.421 HistoryHistory: 1971 c. 278; Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 776 (1975); 1975 c. 218.
345.421 AnnotationThis section applies to civil as well as criminal traffic charges. City of Lodi v. Hine, 107 Wis. 2d 118, 318 N.W.2d 383 (1982).
345.421 AnnotationWhen blood alcohol content is tested under statutory procedures, results of the test are mandatorily admissible. The physical sample tested is not evidence intended, required, or even susceptible of being produced by the state under s. 971.23. State v. Ehlen, 119 Wis. 2d 451, 351 N.W.2d 503 (1984).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2023 · leading case: State v. Walstad, 351 N.W.2d 469 (Wis. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Walstad, 351 N.W.2d 469 (Wis. 1984). · cites it 10× “Following this determination, Walstad pleaded no contest, a judgment of conviction was entered, and an appeal was taken. [3] *488 The state on this appeal responsively argues that the motion to suppress was untimely, because it was not made within ten days, as required by sec.”
City of Lodi v. Hine, 318 N.W.2d 383 (Wis. 1982). · cites it 5× “Sec. 345.421, Stats., states: “Discovery.”
Ozaukee Cnty. v. Flessas, 409 N.W.2d 408 (Wis. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “This letter also contained a motion for discovery pursuant to sec. 345.421, Stats. The letter recited: "Pursuant to Wisconsin Stats, s.”
State v. Booth, 295 N.W.2d 194 (Wis. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “Section 345.421, Stats., allows a court to grant a defendant the right to inspect and test any “devices used to determine presence of alcohol in breath or body fluid .”
State v. Schoepp, 554 N.W.2d 236 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “6 Section 345.421, Stats., provides that defendants to civil and criminal traffic proceedings may not obtain discovery except in limited circumstances.”
City of New Berlin v. Wertz, 314 N.W.2d 911 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981). “Counsel for Wertz made no demand for discovery pursuant to sec. 345.421, Stats. The case was tried to a jury on March 9, 1981.”
State v. Bausch, 2014 WI App 12 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “"); Wis. Stat. § 345.421 ("Neither party is entitled to pretrial discovery except [as provided in this section].”
State v. Humphrey, 318 N.W.2d 386 (Wis. 1982). “” *114 The Booth rule relied partly on sec. 345.421, Stats., which was enacted to establish a uniform procedure for traffic violations where the offense could be charged under the state Motor Vehicle Code or under a conforming municipal ordinance; that section is inapplicable in…”
Dane Cnty. v. McGrew, 679 N.W.2d 926 (Wis. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 8× “arranted because the testimony of the arresting officer is internally inconsistent and incredible as a matter of law; (2) McGrew's due process rights were violated because he was denied access to discovery materials; (3) the circuit court improperly admitted evidence based on a…”
State v. Drexler, 544 N.W.2d 903 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “Not only did Drexler have ample notice that the State would be relying upon a blood test rather than a breath test, he also defended against the blood test.”
Waukesha Cnty. v. Stephen E. Lee (Wis. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× “2022AP1434 § 345.421, which bars discovery in traffic violation cases except as to specific items requested within ten days after an alleged violation: Neither party is entitled to pretrial discovery except that if the defendant moves within 10 days after the alleged violation…”
Clark Cnty. v. James T. Kettner (Wis. Ct. App. 2023). “§ 345.421(2) (in traffic forfeiture cases, “[n]either party is entitled to pretrial discovery” except under limited circumstances pursuant to motion); see also WIS.”
— Wis. Stat. § 345.421(2) — 1 case
Clark Cnty. v. James T. Kettner (Wis. Ct. App. 2023). “§ 345.421(2) (in traffic forfeiture cases, “[n]either party is entitled to pretrial discovery” except under limited circumstances pursuant to motion); see also WIS.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.