On Point blog, page 4 of 6
Defense win: COA reverses order continuing protective placement
La Crosse County and S.A.A. v. M.A., 2025AP269, 10/30/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
In yet another protective placement win, COA agrees that the County’s evidence failed to satisfy the standards and reverses.
SCOTUS’s most recent order list includes impassioned dissent regarding juror impeachment rule
In an interesting dissent from an order denying cert, three justices join together to decry the rigorous application of the juror impeachment rule in a case that resulted in a verdict of death.
Seventh Circuit Cases for September
September brought a couple of criminal and criminal-adjacent cases including:
In fact-intensive TPR appeal, COA rejects numerous creative legal arguments and affirms
State of Wisconsin v. D.R.-R.D.J. 2024AP2406, 10/8/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
In an imposingly lengthy opinion involving an interesting choice of counsel claim (among many others), COA rejects arguments that “Diane” was denied her rights to counsel of choice and to the effective assistance of counsel and affirms.
Publication Orders for July, August and September
As usual, we bring you coverage of COA’s orders regarding publication, this time for July, August and September.
Defense win: In published decision, COA holds that jurors must agree on period of abandonment in TPR
S.S. and L.S. v. A.S.P. and M.P., 2024AP2532, 9/23/25, District III (recommended for publication); case activity
Although COA rejects 2/3 of “Amanda’s” legal arguments, she eventually prevails in a rare plain error win as a result of defective instructions and a defective verdict form with respect to the abandonment ground in this TPR appeal.
COA holds that defendant in forfeiture action is entitled to court costs following DA’s concession and dismissal of case
Dane County v. Jeramiah Bradley, 2025AP172, 9/18/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
In an unusual turn of events, the State actually conceded its prosecution of Bradley was unsupported under the law. The judge dismissed the case, but denied Bradley’s requests for costs. Although the State puts up a number of arguments to get around paying $381.85 in costs, COA rejects those arguments and reverses.
COA, bound by precedent, rejects constitutional challenge involving mandatory minimum CSA charges
State v. Keith Kenyon, 2022AP2228-CR, 9/16/25, District I (recommended for publication); case activity
Although COA is surprisingly candid in acknowledging some of the injustices present in this appeal, the Court ultimately concludes that Kenyon’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by existing precedent.
Eastern District holds that investigators violated 4th Amendment when they viewed suspected child pornography identified via “hash matching;” holds that good faith does not apply
United States of America v. Peter Braun, 24-CR-164 (E.D. Wis. 9/3/25).
In an interesting Fourth Amendment case, the Court holds that law enforcement violated Braun’s rights when it viewed suspected child pornography without a search warrant when that child pornography had not been previously viewed by an employee of an ESP.
COA holds that stipulation forecloses challenge to lack of expert testimony at protective placement hearing; evidence otherwise sufficient
V.K. v. D.J.F., 2024AP2028, 9/10/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
COA ducks a recurrent issue as to whether expert testimony is required to prove the grounds for a protective placement and otherwise affirms the circuit court’s order granting this privately-filed petition for protective placement.