On Point blog, page 1 of 1
COA affirms OWI 1st conviction despite hand sanitizer contamination defense
County of Waukesha v. Jacob A. Vecitis, 2023AP919, 2/12/25, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Vecitis appeals from a judgment, entered after a bench trial, convicting him of OWI 1st, and an order denying reconsideration. COA concludes the circuit court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous and affirms.
COA affirms initial commitment order; expresses critical thoughts as to “flood” of 51 appeals and hints at a renewed willingness to find at least some appeals moot
Winnebago County v. C.H., 2023AP505, 8/30/23, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In this Ch. 51 appeal, COA swats aside familiar 51 arguments, expresses its frustration with a “flood” of Ch. 51 appeals and, with approving citation to a dissent from SCOW, hints that we may not have heard the last of the mootness doctrine in COA with respect to 51 appeals.
Court of appeals affirms circuit court’s fabrication of “oh shit” moment in speeding case
State v. Chris K. Feller, 2019AP318, 11/27/19, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
This appeal poses an interesting question of law: whether the justification defense available in certain civil forfeiture actions applies where a driver exceeds the speed limit in order to get away from another driver who is dangerously tailgating him on the freeway. See State v. Brown, 107 Wis. 2d 44, 318 N.W.2d 370. The court of appeals contorts the undisputed facts in order to duck the issue.
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.
Circuit court’s findings that driver made unexplained swerve into wrong lane were not clearly erroneous
State v. Mark Alan Tralmer, 2015AP715-CR, District 4, 10/8/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The circuit court’s implicit rejection of Tralmer’s suppression hearing testimony and acceptance of the police officer’s contrary testimony were not clearly erroneous and therefore must be upheld on appeal, State v. Arias, 2008 WI 84, ¶12, 311 Wis. 2d 358, 752 N.W.2d 748. Accordingly, the circuit court properly concluded that the officer had reasonable suspicion to stop Tralmer for violating § 346.05(1) by swerving into the wrong lane of traffic when there is no obstruction requiring the driver to do so, as allowed under § 346.05(1)(d).
Evidence Excluded from Case-in-Chief for Discovery Violation Admissible on Rebuttal; Appellate Review: Omitted Transcript Presumed to Support Discretionary Trial Court Ruling; Sleeping Juror
State v. Brent T. Novy, 2012 WI App 10 (recommended for publication), petition for review granted, 6/13/12; for Novy: Joseph George Easton; case activity
Rebuttal – Evidence Excluded from Case-in-Chief for Discovery Violation
Expert witness testimony, excluded from the State’s case-in-chief as a sanction failure to identify the witness during discovery, was admissible on rebuttal to attack the defendant’s testimony after he testified.
Appellate Review – Implicit Findings; Statement – Voluntariness
State v. Armando J. Castanada, No. 2009AP1438-CR, District I, 6/15/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Castanada: Jeremy C. Perri; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Appellate Review – Implicit Findings
¶30 The postconviction circuit court did not make any express findings as to the credibility of any of the witnesses’ testimony. However, as the State observes, when the circuit court does not make express findings,