On Point blog, page 52 of 120
Evidence sufficient to support “bail jumping” verdict, no due process violation for accidental contact with victim
State v. Lavarren D. Etienne, 2014AP2881-CR, 6/18/15, District 4 (one-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
This appeal concerned the sufficiency of evidence to support a jury verdict that Etienne intentionally violated a bond which prohibited him from having contact with “P.J.” Etienne said the contact was accidental. Due to the deference given to jury findings, Etienne’s argument failed. So did his claimed due process violation.
Expiration of ch. 51 commitment made appeal moot, despite continuing restriction on gun possession
Dunn County v. Dennis M., 2014AP2579, District 3, 6/16/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Despite the fact Dennis M. can’t possess a firearm as a result of a prior involuntary commitment order, his appeal from that order is moot because he entered into a voluntary stipulation to recommitment that has expired and not been renewed.
State v. Jimmie Lee Smith, 2013AP1228-CR, petition for review granted 6/12/16
Review of a published court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)
Issue (composed by On Point)
Did the evidence presented at Smith’s postconviction hearing establish reason to doubt that Smith was competent at the time of his trial and sentencing under the standard for retrospective determinations of competency established by State v. Johnson, 133 Wis. 2d 207, 395 N.W.2d 176 (1986)?
Credible victim supports adjudication on one count, but trial court’s mistake of law invalidates adjudication on second count
State v. Arron A.-R., 2014AP142, District 1, 6/2/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Arron delinquency adjudication for one count of first degree sexual assault is supported by the testimony of the victim, S.F., but the adjudication for a second count is reversed because the trial court erred in believing that the charge required only sexual contact, not sexual intercourse.
Discrepancy between officer’s testimony and written report doesn’t mean factual findings were clearly erroneous
State v. Andrew J. Joda, 2014AP1949 & 2014AP1950, District 2, 5/6/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Given the trial court’s conclusion that Deputy Becker’s testimony was more credible than Joda’s testimony, the court factual findings are not clearly erroneous just because there was a discrepancy between Becker’s testimony and his written report and Becker was unable to remember exactly where he was when he saw Joda make an illegal u-turn.
Defendant forfeited challenge to sex offender registration requirement
State v. Eric L. Nigl, 2014AP1876-CR, District 4, 4/30/15 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Nigl challenged his conviction for a sex offender registry violation by attacking the validity of the juvenile delinquency disposition that required him to register. The court of appeals holds Nigl forfeited his challenge because he could have sought a waiver or stay of the registration requirement at the time of the delinquency adjudication.
Challenge to sufficiency of the evidence is frivolous; sanctions ordered
Village of DeForest v. Michael Brault, 2014AP2398, District 4, 4/16/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Brault’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence for his conviction for OWI 1st is frivolous, so sanctions under Rule 809.25(3) are appropriate.
Failure to adequately allege prejudice is fatal to ineffective assistance claim
State v. Frank D. Roseti, 2014AP2299-CR, District 2, 4/15/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to an alleged discovery violation falls short because the defendant does not develop an argument as to why an objection would have prevailed.
Evidence supported conviction for negligent handling of burning material
State v. Nathan M. Caffero, 14AP1711-CR, District 3, 4/7/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Despite the trial testimony of Muxlow, Caffero’s girlfriend, that she was the person who caused the fire in their apartment by putting lit incense on top of a toilet paper roll, Caffero’s own admissions to the police gave the jury a basis to infer he subsequently handled the smoldering roll and that he did so negligently. Therefore, the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction for violating § 941.10.
SCOW: Prosecutor’s closing argument did not ask jurors to draw inference he knew was untrue
State v. Joel M. Hurley, 2015 WI 35, 3/31/15, reversing an unpublished per curiam court of appeals decision; opinion by Justice Gableman; case activity (including briefs)
Disagreeing with the circuit court’s holding that Hurley was entitled to a new trial in the interest of justice, the supreme court holds that the prosecutor did not improperly refer in closing argument to Hurley’s testimony that he could not “recall” allegations regarding sexual assaults that were admitted as other-acts evidence.