Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 938.195 (2026)
Recording custodial interrogations
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
938.195(1)(c)(c) “Place of detention” means a juvenile detention facility, jail, municipal lockup facility, or juvenile correctional facility, or a police or sheriff’s office or other building under the control of a law enforcement agency, at which juveniles are held in custody in connection with an investigation of a delinquent act.
938.195(2)(a)(a) A law enforcement agency shall make an audio or audio and visual recording of any custodial interrogation of a juvenile that is conducted at a place of detention unless a condition under s. 938.31 (3) (c) 1. to 5. applies.
938.195(2)(b)(b) If feasible, a law enforcement agency shall make an audio or audio and visual recording of any custodial interrogation of a juvenile that is conducted at a place other than a place of detention unless a condition under s. 938.31 (3) (c) 1. to 5. applies.
938.195(3)(3) Notice not required. A law enforcement officer or agent of a law enforcement agency conducting a custodial interrogation is not required to inform the subject of the interrogation that the officer or agent is making an audio or audio and visual recording of the interrogation.
938.195 AnnotationIt was a violation of this section for police to cease recording the custodial interrogation under the facts of this case. Nevertheless, the error, if any, in not suppressing some of the defendant’s statements, was harmless. State v. Moore, 2015 WI 54, 363 Wis. 2d 376, 864 N.W.2d 827, 13-0127.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2008–2023 · leading case: State v. Raheem Moore, 2015 WI 54 (Wis. 2015).
State v. Raheem Moore, 2015 WI 54 (Wis. 2015). “Consequently, it was a violation of Wis. Stat. § 938.195 for police to cease recording the interrogation.”
State v. Moore, 2014 WI App 19 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014). “Additionally, Moore argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the unrecorded portion of the statement he made to police near the end of his interrogation as well as the recorded portion that immediately followed because the statements were inadmissible…”
United States v. Bruce, 550 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 2008). “, Wis. Stat. § 938.195 (2)(a) (“A law enforcement agency shall make an audio or audio and visual recording of any custodial interrogation of a juvenile that is conducted at a place of detention .”
State v. Raheem Moore (Wis. 2015). “Consequently, it was a violation of Wis. Stat. § 938.195 for police to cease recording the interrogation.”
State v. Robert Lee Banks (Wis. Ct. App. 2023). “The statute does not contain a preservation requirement, but it would be illogical to compel the State to record custodial interviews without providing a means for defendants and the State to access that information.”
United States v. Bruce, Calvin (7th Cir. 2008). “, Wis. Stat. § 938.195 (2)(a) (“A law enforcement agency shall make an audio or audio and visual recording of any custodial interrogation of a juvenile that is conducted at a place of detention .”
— Wis. Stat. § 938.195(2)(a) — 1 case
State v. Moore, 2014 WI App 19 (Wis. Ct. App. 2014). “Additionally, Moore argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the unrecorded portion of the statement he made to police near the end of his interrogation as well as the recorded portion that immediately followed because the statements were inadmissible…”
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.