On Point blog, page 18 of 50
Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop; OWI – Habitual Offender – Collateral Attack
State v. Randall L. Wegener, 2010AP452-CR, District 1, 8/18/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wegener: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.
Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop
Inclement winter weather didn’t obviate the need to stay within the proper lane, such that crossing the center line, even briefly a few times, provided reasonable suspicion to perform a traffic stop.
¶6 Wegener argues that Fabry did not have reasonable suspicion to conduct a traffic stop because he was driving appropriately for part of the time he was followed and blames his lack of control of his vehicle on the snowy weather conditions.
TPR
Ozaukee Co. HSD v. Sarah H., 2010AP416, District 2, 8/18/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Sarah H.: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate
A CHIPS dispositional order placing a child with a local department and requiring that services be provided to child and family satisfies Sheboygan County DH&HS v. Tanya M.B., 2010 WI 55:
¶5 … What this comes down to is an argument that the dispositional order must contain a magical phrase—“supervision,
Sentence – Factors – Exercise of Constitutional Right; Sentence – Effective Assistance of Counsel
State v. Sabian L. Yunck, 2009AP3020-CR, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Yunck: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Sentence – Factors – Exercise of Constitutional Right
Convicted of violating a domestic abuse order forbidding contact with the mother of his child, Yunck argues that sentence was impermissibly based on his exercise of a constitutional right,
Evidence – Recording – Best Evidence Rule
State v. John D. Harris, 2009AP3140-CR, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Harris: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Testimony of an investigator relating the contents of a recording wasn’t inadmissible under the best evidence rule, § 910.02.
¶11 Although the best evidence rule generally requires an original recording to be played in court in order to prove the content of the recording,
Reasonable Suspicion – Terry Stop
State v. Robert Wendt, 2010AP75-CR, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wendt: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.
Reasonable suspicion supported temporary stop of driver of truck idling at 1:30 a.m. behind business in winter with it snow plow up.
¶16 Here, there were “specific and articulable facts,” as set forth by Sergeant Paul during her testimony,
Sentencing – Factors
State v. William Webber, 2010AP9-CR, District 3, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Webber: Chris A. Gramstrup; BiC; Resp.
On charges of 4th degree sexual assault and obstructing, the sentencing court properly considered, as both aggravating and mitigating, Webber’s 30-year history as a law enforcement officer, as well as his nonconsensual videotaping of his ex-wife.
Plea Withdrawal – Nelson/Bentley Motion
State v. Timothy Ray Anderson, 2009AP2416-CR, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Anderson: Jeremy C. Perri; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Anderson’s postconviction motion for plea withdrawal, on the ground he didn’t understand that a charge “dismissed outright” could nonetheless be considered at sentencing, was properly denied without hearing. The circuit expressly denied that the dismissed charge was factored into the sentence,
Joseph Price v. Pierce, 7th Cir No. 08-1401, 8/13/10
Habeas – Filing Deadline – DNA Motion as Tolling
Price’s postconviction motion for DNA testing in Illinois state court didn’t toll the 28 U.S.C. § 2254 federal habeas deadline, and his habeas petition is therefore deemed untimely.
The court’s analysis relates to Illinois procedure. As will be seen, Wisconsin’s is meaningfully different and should yield a different conclusion. First, the obvious: subject to highly exceptional circumstances,
Reasonable Suspicion – Guzy Factors
State v. Steve J. Will, 2010AP723-CR, District 4, 8/12/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Will: Mark Eisenberg; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Reasonable suspicion to stop Will’s truck is supported under the multi-factor test of State v. Guzy, 139 Wis. 2d 663, 407 N.W.2d 548 (1987): while authorities were monitoring a marijuana field an alarm was set off,
Traffic Stop – No Wisconsin DL; Duration of Stop
State v. James Casas Klausen, 2009AP2268, District 4, 8/12/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Klausen: Tracey A. Wood; BiC; Resp.
Traffic Stop – No Wisconsin DL
Wisconsin law “contemplates that a person with a valid out-of-state driver’s license who becomes a Wisconsin resident has sixty days, after becoming a Wisconsin resident, to apply for a Wisconsin license,” ¶6.