On Point blog, page 1 of 52
COA holds that circuit court did not erroneously exercise discretion in refusing to reopen forfeiture case
Village of Whitefish Bay v. Ross Bolingbroke, 2025AP2547-52, 10/15/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
COA affirms the court’s ruling that Bolingbroke’s audio-only Zoom appearance merited a default judgment and determines that medical evidence provided by Bolingbroke did not justify reopening the matter after a second missed court date.
Defense win: State may not refile charges that circuit court previously erroneously dismissed with prejudice
State v. Terry Lee Anderson, 2025AP1435, 9/17/26, District IV (not recommended for publication); case activity
Anderson appeals the judgment convicting him of three counts that the circuit court had, in a previous case, dismissed with prejudice. COA agrees that the circuit court lacked the authority to disregard its prior dismissal order as void, and remands with instructions that the court vacate the counts that were previously dismissed with prejudice.
COA finds consent to blood test was voluntary under since-repealed provision of Implied Consent Statute
State v. Richard A. Tourtillot, 2024AP1831, 7/7/26, District III (not recommended for publication); case activity
The COA determined the defendant’s consent to a blood draw was voluntary under a since-repealed portion of the Implied Consent Law.
COA certifies sentencing challenge with potentially broad-sweeping impact
State v. Nicholas B. Selerski., 2024AP1846-CR, 6/25/26, District IV (certification opinion); denied 10/14/25; case activity
In a case that might make many appellate attorneys justifiably nervous, COA asks whether we’ve all been getting sentencing law wrong for decades.
COA rejects ineffectiveness arguments in TPR and affirms
Green County v. K.M.S., 2025AP199, 6/18/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
Applying an exceptionally deferential review to K.M.S.’s ineffectiveness claims, COA affirms in the face of a somewhat confusing appellate record.
COA affirms traffic judgment over pro se sufficiency challenges
County of Milwaukee v. Kent Austin Williams, 2025AP2110, 6/16/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
Kent Austin Williams, pro se, challenges the circuit court’s judgment finding him guilty of speeding on the basis that Milwaukee County did not present sufficient evidence to support the violation. COA disagrees and affirms.
SCOTUS denies cert. while Justice Sotomayor encourages Court in a future case to correct lower courts’ improper standard for assessing prejudice for IAC claims based on Batson.
Clark v. Mississippi, USSC No. 25-6846, 6/8/2026, denying petition for certiorari; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS denied Tony Terrell Clark’s petition for a writ of certiorari from the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision affirming his conviction at a capital trial. Clark argued he received ineffective assistance of counsel during jury selection because his trial lawyer did not adequately raise a Batson challenge when the State struck black jurors at a rate five times more than white jurors. Justice Sotomayor joined the Court’s decision to deny certiorari because Clark did not argue his counsel’s performance was deficient, but explained in an accompanying statement why the Court needs to address the conflict among state and federal courts regarding the standard to evaluate prejudice for a Batson claim.
COA affirms convictions for election fraud and misconduct in public office by Milwaukee Election Commission’s deputy director.
State v. Kimberly D. Zapata, 2025AP425-CR, 5/12/26, District I (recommended for publication); case activity
The Deputy Director of the City of Milwaukee Election Commission was convicted at trial of election fraud and misconduct in public office after she had fictitious military absentee ballots sent to a state legislator to publicize the potential for election fraud with such ballots. In a decision recommended for publication, the COA affirmed her convictions because the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find she “obtained” the ballots for purposes of election fraud and acted in her public capacity.
COA again holds that Wisconsin’s implied consent law is constitutional, recommends opinion for publication
County of Trempealeau v. Layne Perry Stenberg, 2024AP281, 4/21/26, District III (recommended for publication); case activity
Stenberg argues that Wis. Stat. § 343.305(2), Wisconsin’s implied consent law, is unconstitutional, both facially and as applied to him. Specifically, he argues that the implied consent law violates the unconstitutional conditions doctrine by requiring him to “forfeit” his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches for the privilege of operating a motor vehicle on a public highway, and that it violates the least intrusive means test under the Fourth Amendment. COA rejects Stenberg’s arguments.
COA: Restitution properly awarded to disorderly conduct victim where defendant fled in and did not return car jointly owned with victim.
State v. Alexander C. Beaver, 2025AP1768-CR, 4/1/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed the circuit court’s award of restitution to a disorderly conduct victim where the defendant fled the scene in a vehicle jointly owned by the victim and the defendant and did not return the vehicle.