On Point blog, page 2 of 17
In a DJW loss, COA generates uncertainty about such claims
Waukesha County v. G.M.M., 2023AP1359, 3/13/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In an appeal presenting a straightforward D.J.W. claim, COA affirms while also giving credence to harmless error arguments.
Seventh Circuit holds that Wisconsin Court of Appeals did not unreasonably apply harmless error test
Deshawn Harold Jewell v. Gary Boughton, No. 22-3082, 1/22/24
Despite an obvious constitutional violation, Jewell is still precluded from obtaining a new trial given that Wisconsin courts did not unreasonably find the error harmless.
D3 affirms denial of plea withdrawal claim under Cross’ “higher, but not substantially higher” rule
State v. Kasey Ann Gomolla, 2022AP199-CR, 2/6/24, District 3 (recommended for publication); case activity
Even if the court of appeals had not recommended this decision for publication, Gomolla’s case seems destined for further review. While the facts here are somewhat distinguishable from State v. Cross, 2010 WI 70, 326 Wis. 2d 492, 786 N.W.2d 64, Cross’ counter-intuitive holding, even with arguably “better” facts, seems to have hamstringed the court of appeals from acknowledging that a plea cannot be said to be “knowing, intelligent, and voluntary” if the defendant does not know the correct maximum penalty. If we had to guess, SCOW will soon be considering whether to reconsider, limit, or overrule Cross.
Misstatement of law by prosecutor in closing argument does not entitle defendant to relief
State v. Troy Allen Shaw, 2023AP697, 1/24/24, District II (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Shaw’s challenge to improper closing argument persuades COA that the prosecutor erred, but fails to overcome the imposing tests for plain and harmless error.
COA offers unconvincing confrontation analysis in published case
State v. Antonio G. Ramirez, Jr., 2021AP1590, 11/15/23, District 2 (recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
There are some serious unresolved confrontation questions around statements alleged victims make in settings involving both medical treatment and criminal investigation: often, during a police-instigated physical examination after an alleged physical or sexual assault. Here, despite turning out a 52-page, recommended-for-publication opinion, the court of appeals fails meaningfully to address any.
COA rejects multiple challenges to first-offense OWI and refusal convictions and affirms
City of Whitewater v. Douglas E. Kosch, 2022AP800, District II, 9/13/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (including briefs)
Although Kosch throws the kitchen sink at his OWI and refusal convictions, COA methodically works through his myriad challenges on a path toward affirmance.
Defense Win! COA suppresses statements obtained while trying to ascertain what defendant threw into garbage after having been arrested
State v. Kale K. Keding, 2022AP1373-CR & 2022AP1374-CR, District IV, 8/31/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
In an eminently readable and refreshing opinion, COA methodically works through a battery of counterarguments to hold that police could not use statements Keding made after having been asked about a tissue he discarded into a wastebasket while in police custody.
COA affirms TPR jury verdict based on harmless error analysis
C.T.L. v. M.L.K., 2023AP402, District III, 7/11/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
The court of appeals confronts two alleged errors stemming from M.L.K.’s TPR jury trial and affirms based on harmless error.
COA rejects IAC claims on deficient performance and prejudice grounds
State v. Julie A. Minnema, 2022AP446-CR, District 4, 6/8/23 (one-judge decision, not eligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
In an unusually lengthy OWI second appeal, the court rejects Minnema’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims either because Minnema failed to establish deficient performance or because Minnema failed to establish prejudice. (Opinion, ¶1).
Defense Win! Invalid waiver of right to counsel results in reversal of TPR order
Winnebago County Department of Human Services v. N.J.D., 2023AP75, 05/03/2023 (District 2) (one-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
Presented with two strong bases to reverse, the court of appeals picks one and holds that because the record “fails to demonstrate that N.D. waived his right to counsel,” the order terminating his parental rights to his daughter is reversed. (Opinion, ¶1).