Stephen L. Crocker
How Judge Crocker rules, drawn from 3 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Crocker no longer sits on this court. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled here.
About Judge Crocker
Stephen L. Crocker served as a United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Wisconsin for 32 years. He left the full-time position in 2024, when Anita M. Boor succeeded him, and continued handling pretrial criminal matters on recall.
How Judge Crocker decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In suppression litigation he credits good-faith reliance on existing law and the totality of circumstances: he acknowledged the legitimate concern that drug-detection dogs trained on (now-legal) hemp complicate probable cause, but declined to suppress where police reasonably relied on settled doctrine and the specific dog's reliability record.
“Setting aside Plancarte's blindered hyperbole, he makes a valid point: the use of drug dogs in the age of legalized marijuana and hemp products must be reexamined. This, however, isn't going to help Plancarte, because existing law--upon which the police were entitled to rely--does not support his argument for suppression.”
Procedural preferences
On 28 U.S.C. 2254 habeas he applies AEDPA deference strictly: the petitioner bears a 'heavy burden' to show the state court's adjudication was unreasonable or contrary to clearly established federal law, and absent that, relief is recommended denied.
“he has failed to meet his heavy burden of showing that the Wisconsin Supreme Court adjudicated them in a manner that was unreasonable or that contradicted clearly established federal law.”
Treats Article III standing as a threshold that disposes of even fraught constitutional cases without reaching the merits: dismissing for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction (without prejudice) when injury is speculative rather than concrete and imminent.
“the issue before this court is narrow and procedural: does plaintiff have standing to bring the instant lawsuit? For the reasons stated above, I have concluded that it does not.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“I conclude that Lepsch is not entitled to habeas relief on his claims because he has failed to meet his heavy burden of showing that the Wisconsin Supreme Court adjudicated them in a manner that was unreasonable or that contradicted clearly established federal law. Accordingly, I am recommending that this court deny the petition.”
“Before the court is defendant Juventino Plancarte's motion to suppress evidence. Dkt. 16. For the reasons stated below, I am recommending that the court deny this motion.”
“IT IS ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss, dkt. 11, is GRANTED, and the motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief, dkt. 10, is DENIED as unnecessary. The case is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 196 days (N = 6).
The reviewed matters include Social Security appeals, civil-rights and employment cases, habeas petitions, suppression recommendations, arbitration, and criminal pretrial work. The description is qualitative rather than a complete caseload census.
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 3 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 1 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 2 |
| Sep 2022 | 3 | 2 |
| Mar 2022 | 1 | 2 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 1 |
| Mar 2021 | 9 | 2 |
| Sep 2020 | 2 | 1 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
A historical record
Judge Crocker no longer sits on this court. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled here. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.