On Point blog, page 1 of 3
Defendant waived trial counsel’s conflict of interest
State v. Michael Wade, 2018AP614-CR, 3/5/19, District 1 (1-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Wade challenged his convictions for misdemeanor intimidation of a witness and violating a domestic abuse injunction on the grounds that his trial lawyer had a conflict of interest: he had previously represented the victim in other criminal matters. The court of appeals held that Wade waived the conflict.
Failure to tell defendant he might get different judge not ineffective
State v. Julius Lee Sanders, 2014AP2644, 6/6/2017, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Julius Sanders appeals from his judgment of conviction and the denial, without a hearing, of his postconviction motion.
Defendant forfeited right to counsel of choice; failed to show deficient performance
State v. Annette Morales-Rodriguez, 2014AP1438-CR, District 1, 2/3/15 (not recommended for publication); click here for briefs
A defendant must assert that she was denied her constitutional right to the counsel of her choice before trial, not after. Also, an attorney clears the “deficient performance” prong of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim where he withdraws as counsel based on a possible conflict even if the client wants him as her lawyer and will waive the conflict.
Trial counsel’s exchange with trial court about a misstatment of fact in a suppression motion didn’t create conflict of interest or establish judicial bias
State v. Marcos Ordonia-Roman, 2012AP1371-CR, District 1/4, 4/10/14; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
In a motion to suppress Ordonia-Roman’s confession, trial counsel alleged that during his interrogation Ordonia-Roman was without a required medication and was not allowed to take the medication. At the suppression hearing, however, Ordonia-Roman testified he had been prescribed the medication,
Conflict of interest – dual representation of defendant and a defense witness facing perjury charges
State v. Jesus C. Villarreal, 2013 WI App 33; case activity
Trial counsel was ineffective because he had an actual conflict of interest arising from his dual representation of both Villareal and a defense witness who had testified at Villarreal’s first trial (which ended in a hung jury ) and who, before the second trial, was accused of committing perjury during the first trial.
The witness was Villarreal’s sister,
Right to Counsel of Choice: Lawyer as Client’s Witness
State v. Jose O. Gonzalez-Villarreal, 2012 WI App 110 (recommended for publication); case activity
Counsel (Michael J. Knoeller) was present while the police interrogated, and elicited incriminating responses from, his client, Gonzalez-Villarreal. G-V didn’t speak English, and Knoeller doubled as interpreter. The state issued charges, and Knoeller continued to represent G-V. However, the state moved to disqualify Knoeller as counsel, arguing that his service as interpreter during the interrogation created a risk that Knoeller might have to testify.
TPR – Effective Assistance of Counsel – Conflict of Interest
Dunn County Human Services v. Eric R., 2011AP2416, District 3, 9/5/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
That counsel for the parent on a termination petition had, while serving as a family court commissioner 19 months earlier, entered a child support order against the parent, did not alone establish a conflict of interest. Supreme Court Rule 20:1.12(a) (“a lawyer shall not represent anyone in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a judge”),
Counsel – Substitute; Jury Selection – Forfeiture of Issue; Other Acts Evidence; Sentencing
State v. James E. Emerson, 2011AP1028-CR, District 3, 6/26/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Counsel – Substitute
Given findings made by the lower court after an evidentiary hearing, the court of appeals upholds denial of counsel’s motion to withdraw: counsel was prepared for trial; “(t)his was a dilatory tactic by the defendant,” on the eve of trial after the charge had been pending for some time;
Joe Freeman v. Chandler, 7th Cir No. 10-1467, 6/20/11
seventh circuit court of appeals decision
Habeas – Successive Petition – Rule 60(b) Motion
A Rule 60 motion for relief from (habeas) judgment amounts to an impermissible successive petition – which the district court lacks jurisdiction to entertain – if it raises arguments forbidden by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1) or (2), Gonzales v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524 (2005). Although the district court held that Freeman had waived the issue (right to conflict-free counsel) before raising it in his Rule 60 motion,
Standing – Generally; Counsel – Choice of, Disqualification – Civil
Susan Foley-Ciccantelli v. Bishop’s Grove Condominium Association, Inc., 2011 WI 36, on certification; case activity
Standing – Generally
Lead opinion (3-Justice):
¶5 There is no single longstanding or uniform test to determine standing in the case law. Courts have inconsistently used a variety of terminologies as tests for standing. Therefore, as a prerequisite to answering the first question, we review the law of standing.