On Point blog, page 21 of 49
Delinquency Adjudication – Theft – Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Juan I. C., 2010AP3114, District 4, 7/21/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Juan I.C.: Susan E. Alesia, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Credibility determination made by trial judge supported delinquency adjudication for theft of iPod that Juan borrowed but failed to return.
¶11 On the disputed issue of whether Juan repeatedly assured Max and JeVaughnte that he would either return the iPod or pay for it,
Guest Post: Hon. Richard J. Sankovitz, “Teachable Moments and Missed Opportunities in Funk and Denson”
On Point is very pleased to present this Guest Post discussion of State v. Funk and State v. Denson, by the Honorable Richard J. Sankovitz, Milwaukee County Circuit Court. Feel free to submit comments in the box at the end of the Post.
Trial judges monitor the flurry of end-of-term Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions for new rules of decision and new procedures to be followed in our courts.
TPR – Totality of Circumstances Test
D’Ann K. v. Benjamin J. G., 2010AP1655, District 4, 7/20/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Benjamin J.G.: Gina Frances Bosben; case activity
With failure to assume parental responsibility as the ground for termination, Benjamin G. “argues that the court did not properly apply the totality of the circumstances test established in Tammy W-G. because it failed to consider Benjamin’s testimony that D’Ann [the guardian] failed to return his phone calls.”
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion
State v. Kevin J. Burch, 2011AP666-CR, District 4, 7/21/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Burch: Christopher W. Dyer; case activity
Reasonable suspicion of impaired driving supported the stop:
¶4 The officer was operating a squad car in West Salem late one weekday night when, at 12:44 a.m., the officer observed a truck that drew his attention. The truck drew his attention because it was traveling “at an extremely low rate of speed,
Terry Stop – Reasonable Suspicion – Citizen-Informant; Duration
State v. Michael D. Walters, 2010AP3156-CR, District 2, 7/20/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Walters: Thomas E. Hayes; case activity
Tip provided by citizen informant’s 911 call reporting drug use in car traveling on highway was sufficiently reliable to support stop, given that the informant provided her name, phone number, description of her vehicle, her proximate location and direction of travel, and remained on the line with updates:
¶23 According to Williams,
Traffic Stop – Air Freshener
State v. Cathy Ann Currie, 2011AP322-CR, District 3, 7/19/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Currie: Jon Stanek; case activity
¶7 Lear testified he stopped Currie because he observed “a very large air freshener” hanging from her rearview mirror. The court determined that any object hanging from a rearview mirror would obstruct a driver’s clear view through the front of the windshield. The court also found Lear’s testimony about his observations credible.
Postconviction Hearing (§ 974.06) – IAC Claim – Pleading Requirements
State v. David J. Balliette, 2011 WI 79, reversing unpublished decision; for Balliette: Steven D. Grunder, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Balliette’s pro se § 974.06 motion, asserting ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel for failing to raise ineffective assistance of trial counsel on direct appeal, was insufficiently pleaded to require an evidentiary hearing.
Unless you’re an appellate specialist or a masochist –
Evidentiary Foundation / Hearsay: Computer-Generated Report
State v. Gregg B. Kandutsch, 2011 WI 78, affirming unpublished decision; for Kandutsch: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Computer-Generated Report (Electronic Monitoring Device) – Foundation
Expert testimony isn’t necessary to lay a foundation for admissibility for a computer-generated EMD report:
¶28 Closing down a trial is not to be taken lightly, which is why the requirement of expert testimony is an extraordinary one.
Juvenile Delinquency Disposition – Expelled Student; Supervisory Writs; Statutory Construction Principle – Titles
Madison Metropolitan School District v. Circuit Court for Dane County, 2011 WI 72, affirming summary order; case activity
Juvenile Delinquency Disposition – Expelled Student
A juvenile delinquency court lacks authority to order a school district to provide educational services to a delinquent whom the district has expelled.
¶5 We conclude:
…
(2) A circuit court does not have statutory authority to order a school district to provide alternative educational services to a juvenile who has been expelled from school by a lawful and unchallenged expulsion order but is still residing in the community.
Confrontation – Limits on Cross-Examination
State v. Olu A. Rhodes, 2011 WI 73, reversing unpublished COA decision; for Rhodes: John J. Grau; case activity
Although the State’s theory of motive was that Rhodes intentionally shot and killed the victim in retaliation for beating Rhodes’ sister the day before, the trial court reasonably precluded cross-examination of the sister on a prior instance where the victim severely beat her without response from Rhodes.