On Point blog, page 1 of 5
COA declines to consider constitutional challenge to ordinance because defendant failed to serve AG or join city as party
State v. Kevin Richard Raddemann, 2022AP668-CR, 12/21/22, District II (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs).
In this misdemeanor OWI case, Raddemann moved to suppress evidence obtained following a stop of his vehicle. After the suppression hearing, he moved for reconsideration, arguing that a City of Hartford cemetery ordinance, which was the basis for the stop, was unconstitutionally vague. The circuit court denied Raddemann’s motion to reconsider because it was untimely. ¶5.
COA: evidence sufficient for ch. 51 extension
La Crosse County v. J.M.A., 2018AP1258, 11/21/19, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
J.M.A. appeals his recommitment under ch. 51. He argues the psychiatrist who was the sole witness at his trial provided only conclusory testimony on dangerousness; the court of appeals disagrees.
SCOTUS: lawyer who ignores client’s request for appeal from guilty plea is ineffective
Garza v. Idaho, USSC No. 17-1026, reversing Garza v. State, 405 P.3d 576 (Idaho 2017); Scotusblog page (includes links to briefs and commentary)
This case involved two plea agreements that included clauses stating that Garza waived his right to appeal. After sentencing, Garza told his lawyer that he wanted to appeal, but his lawyer refused due to the plea agreement. Garza filed claim for ineffective assistance of counsel. Siding with Garza, SCOTUS held that counsel performed deficiently and that “prejudiced is presumed” because the failure to file a notice of appeal deprived Garza of an appeal altogether. Opinion at 1.
SCOTUS will address effect of lawyer’s failure to file notice of appeal where plea agreement included an appeal waiver
Gilberto Garza, Jr. v. Idaho, USSC No. 17-1026, certiorari granted 6/18/18
Does the “presumption of prejudice” recognized in Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (2000), apply where a criminal defendant instructs his trial counsel to file a notice of appeal but trial counsel decides not to do so because the defendant’s plea agreement included an appeal waiver?
Court of appeals affirms plea though defendant misunderstood appellate rights; trips over law governing plea withdrawal and IAC
State v. Jeromy Miller, 2014AP1246-CR, 2/24/15, District 2 (not recommended for publication); click here for docket and briefs
This decision smells like SCOW bait. Miller pleaded guilty believing that he had the right to appeal the circuit court’s denial of his pre-trial motion to dismiss. Both the court and defense counsel told him so. The State concedes they were wrong. The court of appeals held the error harmless because the motion had no merit. In doing so it bungled case law re plea withdrawal and the “prejudice” prong of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
SCOW: Six-person jury for involuntary mental commitment survives equal protection challenge
Milwaukee County v. Mary F.-R., 2012AP958, affirming an unpublished court of appeals opinion; case activity
Majority opinion by Justice Crooks; concurrence by Chief Justice Abrahamson; additional concurrence by Justice Ziegler (joined by Justices Roggensack and Gableman)
The issues in this case spring from State v. Post, 197 Wis. 2d 279, 318-319, 541 N.W.2d 115 (1995)(“persons committed under Chapters 51 and 980 are similarly situated for purposes of equal protection comparison) and State v.
Right to unanimous jury verdict; continuing course of conduct chargeable as one count
State v. David J. Galarowicz, 2012AP933-CR, District 3, 12/11/12
court of appeals decision (1 judge; not eligible for publication); case activity
Galarowicz was not denied his right to a unanimous jury verdict on one count of disorderly conduct where the evidence showed an incident of disorderly conduct with the victim in the residence and additional conduct with the same victim in the residence after a twenty-minute pause.
State v. Travis J. Seaton, 2012AP918 / State v. Nancy J. Pinno, 2011AP2424-CR, District 2, 12/5/12
court of appeals certification request; certification granted 2/25/13; case activity (Seaton); case activity (Pinno)
Issue Presented (from Certification):
Is the failure to object to the closure of a public trial to be analyzed upon appellate review under the “forfeiture standard” or the “waiver standard”?
As suggested, in each of these consolidated cases the trial judge barred the public from the courtroom (during jury selection in each instance),
Waiver / Forfeiture of Right: Generally – Right to Presence / Testify; Sentencing: Accurate Information – New Factor
State v. Allen Dell Vaughn, 2012 WI App 129 (recommended for publication); case activity
Waiver / Forfeiture of Right, Generally
Waiver is the intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege; forfeiture is: (1) the failure to object to something without intending to relinquish that which an objection might have preserved and (2) doing something incompatible with the assertion of a right, ¶21, citing State v.
Waiver (Lack of Objection); Instructions – Self-Defense; McMorris Evidence
State v. Curtis L. Jackson, 2011AP2698-CR, District 1, 10/10/12; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication), petition for review granted 2/11/13, affirmed, 2014 WI 4 (1/22/14); case activity
Waiver (Lack of Objection), Generally – Jury Instructions
¶8 … To obtain relief based on a jury instruction to which no objection was made, Jackson must show that “considering the proceedings as a whole,