On Point blog, page 1 of 71
COA rejects attempt to apply Cronic to TPR IAC claim and affirms
State v. V.T., 2025AP1338-40, 3/23/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
In an interesting ineffectiveness appeal, COA confronts clear-cut deficient performance but declines V.T.’s invitation to depart from the Strickland prejudice standard.
7th Circuit reverses Wisconsin defendant’s district court habeas win
Maurice J. Holt v. Gary Boughton, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 24-3346, 3/30/26
Holt was tried and convicted of armed robbery and other crimes after three men entered an apartment and took property at gunpoint. After exhausting his state appeals, Holt sought habeas relief in federal court and the district court granted his petition. The 7th circuit disagrees and reverses.
SCOTUS holds that trial court may limit discussion between defendant and counsel during overnight trial recess about defendant’s testimony for its own sake but not about issues incidental to testimony.
Villarreal v. Texas, USSC No. 24-557, 2/25/2025, affirming Villarreal v. State, 707 S.W.3d 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 2024) ; Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS holds that testifying criminal defendant may be prohibited by trial court from conferring with defense counsel during an overnight recess about testimony for its own sake but not about matters incidental to testimony.
COA clarifies state’s burden to show valid waiver of counsel on a collateral attack motion in decision recommended for publication
State v. Robert M. Christianson, 2024AP1884-CR, 2/12/26, District IV (recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Christianson pleaded no contest to OWI 8th after the circuit court rejected his collateral challenges to 3 prior OWI convictions. On appeal, he renews his arguments that the three convictions are invalid because he did not have legal counsel, he did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily (“KIV”) waive his right to counsel, and the court handling the case failed to find that he was competent to proceed without counsel in each case. COA concludes that Christianson made a prima facie showing that he was denied his constitutional right to counsel in all three cases, but the state met its burden to show that he nonetheless validly waived his right to counsel in 2 of the 3 cases, and the circuit court properly found that he was competent to proceed without counsel.
Defense Win: COA clarifies defense of others doctrine and holds erroneous instructions merit new trial
State v. Tommy Jay Cross, 2023AP2013-CR, 11/4/25, District III (recommended for publication); case activity
In an opinion that might remind some readers of their first year of law school, COA outlines the basic principles of Wisconsin’s self-defense doctrine and holds that the jury was given inaccurate instructions on the subject as it pertains to defense of others.
In fact-intensive TPR appeal, COA rejects numerous creative legal arguments and affirms
State of Wisconsin v. D.R.-R.D.J. 2024AP2406, 10/8/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
In an imposingly lengthy opinion involving an interesting choice of counsel claim (among many others), COA rejects arguments that “Diane” was denied her rights to counsel of choice and to the effective assistance of counsel and affirms.
COA holds that driver’s odor of alcohol and prior conviction for OWI provides reasonable suspicion to extend traffic stop
State v. Peter Joseph Idell, 2024AP2230, District I, 6/17/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA holds that an odor of intoxicants and the driver’s 2009 conviction for OWI established reasonable suspicion to extend stop for expired license plates to investigate OWI.
SCOW relies on deferential standard of review to reject allegation that Zoom procedure violated defendant’s due process rights
State v. Kordell Grady, 2025 WI 22, 6/13/25, affirming COA’s summary disposition order; case activity
Although SCOW presumably took this case to clarify the rules of Zoom court–and the oral argument focused intensely on such questions–SCOW ultimately opts to issue a decision which makes no substantive law and denies relief based on what it claims is a deferential review of the circuit court’s factual findings.
COA: Sufficient evidence to request blood draw independent from defendant’s compelled statements; defendant’s IAC claims were conclusory and undeveloped.
State v. Nicholas J. Nero, 2023AP543, District III, 6/10/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA found that law enforcement had probable cause that Nicholas Nero was driving under the influence, independent from his compelled statement to his probation officer and un-Mirandized statement to a deputy sheriff, and therefore affirmed the circuit court’s order denying his motion to suppress the results of his blood draw. The COA also found that Nero’s claims for ineffective assistance of counsel at trial were conclusory and undeveloped.
COA: Defendant not prejudiced at trial for OWI by “numbers-only” jury selection process.
State v. Nicholas J. Bergner, 2024AP1875, District I, 6/3/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order denying Nicolas Bergner’s postconviction motion for a new trial. Although the circuit court did not follow the procedure required by SCOW in Tucker for using a numbers-only jury selection process, to which trial counsel did not object, Bergner was not prejudiced.