On Point blog, page 46 of 118
SCOW reformulates “clearly erroneous” standard, renders competency findings unassailable
State v. Jimmie Lee Smith, 2016 WI 23, 4/7/16, reversing a published court of appeals decision, majority opinion by Roggensack, concurrence by Ziegler, dissent by Abrahamson (joined by A.W. Bradley); case activity (including briefs)
You can’t accuse the majority of mere error correction in this decision. Although the State never asked SCOW to rewrite the “clearly erroneous” standard of review and nobody briefed or orally argued the issue (see Ziegler’s concurrence and Abrahamson’s dissent), the majority seized the opportunity to make a tough standard even tougher. Unless SCOTUS steps in, it’s going to be virtually impossible to challenge circuit court competency findings as well as other circuit court decisions governed by the “clearly erroneous” standard of review.
Child abuse convictions survive due process, free exercise challenges
State v. Alina N. Caminiti, 2015AP122-CR, and State v. Matthew B. Caminiti, 2015AP123-CR, 4/6/2016, District 4 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs).
The Caminitis were members of a church in Black Earth whose leader (Matthew’s father) advocated “rod discipline”–the beating of infants and young children on the bare buttocks with wooden spoons or dowels, often resulting in bruising. The father’s convictions for conspiracy to commit child abuse were affirmed by the court of appeals in 2014; the Caminitis now appeal their convictions at trial for physical abuse of their two children on substantive due process and religious freedom grounds.
Counsel not ineffective for not striking juror
State v. Todd Brian Tobatto, 2016 WI App 28; case activity (including briefs)
The news, in this otherwise run-of-the-mill case, is the standard of review.
Any error in excusing juror or allowing notes during closing harmless
State v. Jesus C. Gonzalez, 2015AP784-CR, 3/8/16, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Gonzalez raises two challenges to his conviction, at jury trial, of reckless homicide and reckless endangerment. The court of appeals finds any error harmless.
Circuit court erred in excluding field sobriety test evidence
State v. Robert A. Schoengarth, 2015AP1834-CR, 2/11/16, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion when it ordered that police could not testify about Schoengarth’s performance on field sobriety tests.
DOJ not prohibited from suggesting innocent man has criminal record
Dennis A. Teague v. J. B. Van Hollen, 2016 WI App 20, petition for review granted 6/15/16, reversed, 2017 WI 56 ; case activity (including briefs)
Dennis A. Teague has no criminal record. But somebody who once used his name, and a date of birth similar to his, does. The ironic result is that Teague, a likely victim of identity theft, is now suggested to be a criminal by the Department of Justice’s criminal history database. Teague, understandably, objects, but the court of appeals concludes it has no power to fix the problem.
Court’s reliance on inaccurate information re juvenile’s risk of reoffending was harmless
City of Milwaukee v. D.S., 2015AP1634, 2/2/16, District 1 (one-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity
D.S., a juvenile, was ordered to register as a sex offender for life. On appeal, he argued that the circuit court relied on two types of inaccurate information: (1) a report, prepared by Dr. Paul Hesse, regarding the recidivism rate for juvenile sex offenders at Lincoln Hills, and (2) misinformation about the meaning of D.S.’s JSOAP-II scores. He lost on both counts.
SCOTUS: Sufficiency of evidence measured against statutory elements, not erroneous jury instruction
Musacchio v. United States, USSC No. 14-1095, 2016 WL 280757 (January 25, 2016), affirming United States v. Musacchio, 590 Fed. Appx. 359 (5th Cir. 2014); Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary)
Resolving a split among the federal circuits, a unanimous Supreme Court holds that when a jury instruction sets forth all the elements of the charged crime but incorrectly adds one more element, a sufficiency of evidence challenge is assessed against the elements of the charged crime, not against the erroneously heightened command in the jury instruction.
Restitution order upheld
State v. Guadalupe Ronzon, 2015AP498, 1/26/16, District 1 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Ronzon challenges the restitution award in her conviction of failing to fulfill her Wis. Stat. § 346.67 duty upon striking a vehicle with her car.
Failure to follow briefing rules gets appeal dismissed
City of Milwaukee v. Jerry D. Butler, 2015AP1537, 1/26/16, District 1 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
A pro se appellant’s failure to comply with briefing rules results in his appeal being dismissed as “defective.” (¶11).