standard for reviewing a circuit court's findings of fact is essentially the same as the current "clearly erroneous" standard of review). As a matter of constitutional fact, we independently conclude that Johnson did not freely and voluntarily give his consent to search his vehicle. IV ¶ 20. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 11 of the Wisconsin Constitution protect persons from unreasonable governmental searches and seizures. In general, our cases have ordinarily construed the search and seizure protections of the state and federal constitutions coextensively. See, e.g. State v. Williams, 2001 WI 21, ¶ 18 n.6, 241 Wis. 2d 631, 623 N.W.2d 106 (citation omitted); but see State v. Eason, 2001 WI 98, ¶ 63, 245 Wis. 2d 206, 629 N.W.2d 625 (<HOLDING>). ¶ 21. During an investigative stop, an
holding that the exclusionary rule under the fourth amendment applies to civil forfeiture proceedings holding that the fourth amendment exclusionary rule should not bar the use of evidence obtained by police officers acting in good faith and with reasonable reliance on a facially valid search warrant recognizing good faith exception to fourth amendment exclusionary rule holding that with respect to the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule article 1 section 11 of the wisconsin constitution affords additional protection than that which is afforded by the fourth amendment holding that an exception to the fourth amendment exclusionary rule applies where the police would have obtained the evidence if no illegality had occurred