Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (2026)
Search warrant; property subject to seizure
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
968.13(1)(a)(a) Contraband, which includes without limitation because of enumeration lottery tickets, gambling machines or other gambling devices, lewd, obscene or indecent written matter, pictures, sound recordings or motion picture films, forged money or written instruments and the tools, dies, machines or materials for making them, and controlled substances, as defined in s. 961.01 (4), and controlled substance analogs, as defined in s. 961.01 (4m), and the implements for smoking or injecting them. Gambling machines or other gambling devices possessed by a shipbuilding business that complies with s. 945.095 are not subject to this section.
968.13(1)(b)(b) Anything which is the fruit of or has been used in the commission of any crime or of a violation of s. 346.63 or a local ordinance in conformity therewith.
968.13(1)(c)(c) Anything other than documents which may constitute evidence of any crime or of a violation of s. 346.63 or a local ordinance in conformity therewith.
968.13(1)(d)(d) Documents which may constitute evidence of any crime, if probable cause is shown that the documents are under the control of a person who is reasonably suspected to be concerned in the commission of that crime under s. 939.05 (2).
968.13(2)(2) In this section, “documents” includes, but is not limited to, books, papers, records, recordings, tapes, photographs, films or computer or electronic data.
968.13 AnnotationAn adversary hearing is not necessary for the seizure of a limited quantity of obscene material as evidence but is necessary before more than evidentiary copies are seized. State ex rel. Howard v. O’Connell, 53 Wis. 2d 248, 192 N.W.2d 201 (1971).
968.13 Annotation“Contraband” under sub. (1) (a) is not limited to items that are per se illegal; it also encompasses items used, acquired, or transferred illegally, including money. State v. Jones, 226 Wis. 2d 565, 594 N.W.2d 738 (1999), 97-3306.
968.13 AnnotationFuture electronic data generated by a global positioning system (GPS) tracking device is not “electronic data” under the control of the individual as the term is used in sub. (2). State v. Pinder, 2018 WI 106, 384 Wis. 2d 416, 919 N.W.2d 568, 17-0208.
968.13 NoteNOTE: See also the notes to article I, section 11, of the Wisconsin Constitution.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1969–2022 · leading case: Jones v. State, 594 N.W.2d 738 (Wis. 1999).
Jones v. State, 594 N.W.2d 738 (Wis. 1999). “20 , is cash considered "contraband" within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (1), particularly when the charge arising out of the property seized during the search is ultimately dismissed? When the state has not instituted forfeiture proceedings and an interested party seeks…”
State v. Johnny K. Pinder, 919 N.W.2d 568 (Wis. 2018). “It is not a warrant that seeks a "document" or "electronic data" under the control of the vehicle owner as is required under Wis. Stat. § 968.13 and thus, is not subject to the execution and return provisions of §§ 968.”
State v. Bobby L. Tate, 2014 WI 89 (Wis. 2014). “12(1) must be read in concert with Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (2) and Wis. Stat. § 968.”
State v. Sveum, 2010 WI 92 (Wis. 2010). “[6] *345 Even if one construes the Order as targeting a search of a designated object or place, it was not "for the purposing of seizing designated property" [7] unless the data information fits within Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (1)(c). ¶ 105 Furthermore, the Order/Warrant did not…”
In Re Return of Prop. in State v. Benhoff, 518 N.W.2d 307 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “*604 Our supreme court has described the predecessor [2] of §§ 968.13(1) and 968.20, STATS., as the Wisconsin "contraband statute.”
United States v. Houston, 665 F.3d 991 (8th Cir. 2012). “See Wis. Stat. § 968.13 ; State v. Intercontinental, Ltd.”
State v. Intercontinental, Ltd., 486 A.2d 174 (Md. 1985). “) (any property constituting evidence of an offense, except "personal writings”); Utah Code Ann. § 77-23-2 (1982); Vt.”
State v. Heaney, 676 N.W.2d 698 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004). “Due process The district court agreed with Hea-ney’s argument that the blood plasma sample was obtained in violation of Wisconsin due process requirements because the sample was obtained by a subpoena for documents under Wis. Stat. § 968.135 (2002), rather than by a search…”
Ameritech Corp. v. McCann, 308 F. Supp. 2d 911 (E.D. Wis. 2004). “” (Answer and Defenses to the Supplemental Complaint, ¶ 5) (emphasis added).”
State v. Christopher, 170 N.W.2d 803 (Wis. 1969). “4 Sec. 968.13, Stats., provides: “In lieu of prosecuting a writ of error, either party may appeal to the supreme court in the manner provided in civil cases.”
State v. Johnny K. Pinder (Wis. 2018). “It is not a warrant that seeks a "document" or "electronic data" under the control of the vehicle owner as is required under Wis. Stat. § 968.13 and thus, is not subject to the execution and return provisions of §§ 968.”
J.O. v. Twp. of Bedminster, 77 A.3d 1242 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2013). “015 (3) (2013); Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (1)(d) (2013); Conn. Gen.”
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(1) — 2 cases
In Re Return of Prop. in State v. Benhoff, 518 N.W.2d 307 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “*604 Our supreme court has described the predecessor [2] of §§ 968.13(1) and 968.20, STATS., as the Wisconsin "contraband statute.”
Jones v. State, 594 N.W.2d 738 (Wis. 1999). “20 , is cash considered "contraband" within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (1), particularly when the charge arising out of the property seized during the search is ultimately dismissed? When the state has not instituted forfeiture proceedings and an interested party seeks…”
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(1)(a) — 5 cases
Jones v. State, 594 N.W.2d 738 (Wis. 1999). “20 , is cash considered "contraband" within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (1), particularly when the charge arising out of the property seized during the search is ultimately dismissed? When the state has not instituted forfeiture proceedings and an interested party seeks…”
In Re Return of Prop. in State v. Benhoff, 518 N.W.2d 307 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “*604 Our supreme court has described the predecessor [2] of §§ 968.13(1) and 968.20, STATS., as the Wisconsin "contraband statute.”
State v. McKinley E. Pye (Wis. Ct. App. 2022).
State v. Perez, 2000 WI App 115 (Wis. Ct. App. 2000).
JD Prime Games Kiosk, LLC v. DOR (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(1)(c) — 1 case
State v. Sveum, 2010 WI 92 (Wis. 2010). “[6] *345 Even if one construes the Order as targeting a search of a designated object or place, it was not "for the purposing of seizing designated property" [7] unless the data information fits within Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (1)(c). ¶ 105 Furthermore, the Order/Warrant did not…”
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(1)(d) — 3 cases
State v. Johnny K. Pinder, 919 N.W.2d 568 (Wis. 2018). “It is not a warrant that seeks a "document" or "electronic data" under the control of the vehicle owner as is required under Wis. Stat. § 968.13 and thus, is not subject to the execution and return provisions of §§ 968.”
State v. Bobby L. Tate, 2014 WI 89 (Wis. 2014). “12(1) must be read in concert with Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (2) and Wis. Stat. § 968.”
State v. Johnny K. Pinder (Wis. 2018). “It is not a warrant that seeks a "document" or "electronic data" under the control of the vehicle owner as is required under Wis. Stat. § 968.13 and thus, is not subject to the execution and return provisions of §§ 968.”
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(2) — 2 cases
State v. Johnny K. Pinder, 919 N.W.2d 568 (Wis. 2018). “It is not a warrant that seeks a "document" or "electronic data" under the control of the vehicle owner as is required under Wis. Stat. § 968.13 and thus, is not subject to the execution and return provisions of §§ 968.”
State v. Johnny K. Pinder (Wis. 2018). “It is not a warrant that seeks a "document" or "electronic data" under the control of the vehicle owner as is required under Wis. Stat. § 968.13 and thus, is not subject to the execution and return provisions of §§ 968.”
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(l)(a) — 3 cases
In Re Return of Prop. in State v. Benhoff, 518 N.W.2d 307 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994). “*604 Our supreme court has described the predecessor [2] of §§ 968.13(1) and 968.20, STATS., as the Wisconsin "contraband statute.”
Paepke v. Leck, 496 N.W.2d 181 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992).
Paepke v. Leck, 507 N.W.2d 339 (Wis. 1993).
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(l)(c) — 1 case
State v. Sveum, 2010 WI 92 (Wis. 2010). “[6] *345 Even if one construes the Order as targeting a search of a designated object or place, it was not "for the purposing of seizing designated property" [7] unless the data information fits within Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (1)(c). ¶ 105 Furthermore, the Order/Warrant did not…”
— Wis. Stat. § 968.13(l)(d) — 1 case
State v. Bobby L. Tate, 2014 WI 89 (Wis. 2014). “12(1) must be read in concert with Wis. Stat. § 968.13 (2) and Wis. Stat. § 968.”
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.