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

Wis. Stat. § 345.52 (2026)

No double prosecution

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
345.52345.52 No double prosecution.
345.52(1)(1) A judgment on the merits in a traffic ordinance action bars any proceeding under a state statute for the same violation. A judgment on the merits in an action under a state statute bars any proceeding under a traffic ordinance enacted in conformity with the state statute for the same violation.
345.52(2)(2) The pendency of an action under a traffic ordinance is grounds for staying an action under a state statute for the same violation. The pendency of an action under a state statute is grounds for staying an action under a traffic ordinance enacted in conformity with the state statute for the same violation.
345.52 HistoryHistory: 1971 c. 278.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2022 · leading case: State v. Thierfelder, 495 N.W.2d 669 (Wis. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Thierfelder, 495 N.W.2d 669 (Wis. 1993). · cites it 5× “The defendant asserts that the criminal prosecution is barred by sec. 345.52(1), Stats. 1987-88, which provides: A judgment on the merits in a traffic ordinance action bars any proceeding under a state statute for the same violation.”
State v. Aman D. Singh (Wis. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 7× “§ 345.52(1).3 The circuit court denied the motion, and Singh appealed.”
State v. Singh, 918 N.W.2d 644 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “§ 345.52 provides: "(1) A judgment on the merits in a traffic ordinance action bars any proceeding under a state statute for the same violation.”
State v. Aman D. Singh (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 345.52(1). ¶10 In a comprehensive written decision, the circuit court (the Honorable Stephen Ehlke, presiding) denied Singh’s motion, explaining that WIS.”
— Wis. Stat. § 345.52(1) — 4 cases
State v. Thierfelder, 495 N.W.2d 669 (Wis. 1993). “The defendant asserts that the criminal prosecution is barred by sec. 345.52(1), Stats. 1987-88, which provides: A judgment on the merits in a traffic ordinance action bars any proceeding under a state statute for the same violation.”
State v. Aman D. Singh (Wis. Ct. App. 2022). “§ 345.52(1).3 The circuit court denied the motion, and Singh appealed.”
State v. Singh, 918 N.W.2d 644 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018). “§ 345.52 provides: "(1) A judgment on the merits in a traffic ordinance action bars any proceeding under a state statute for the same violation.”
State v. Aman D. Singh (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 345.52(1). ¶10 In a comprehensive written decision, the circuit court (the Honorable Stephen Ehlke, presiding) denied Singh’s motion, explaining that 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.