On Point blog, page 1 of 22
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.
COA holds prior recantation of allegation made by alleged victim against same defendant inadmissible for impeachment
State v. Johnny Ray Martin, 2023AP603, 5/28/25, District III (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
COA rejects Martin’s claims that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion by denying his attempt to impeach the alleged victim with her prior recantation of a separate incident, and that defense counsel was ineffective by failing to adequately investigate the recantation, prepare to address the recantation at trial, and argue the issue under the correct legal theory.
7th Circuit denies habeas relief to Wisconsin prisoner on IAC claim
William Thomas Hudson, III v. Sue DeHaan, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 23-2395, 2/11/25
Hudson was tried and convicted of conspiracy to commit first degree intentional homicide and of conspiracy to commit arson. After his convictions were affirmed on his direct appeal, Hudson filed a 974.06 postconviction motion alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call his sister as a witness and not investigating her potential testimony, and that his postconviction counsel was ineffective for failing to raise these claims.
COA rejects a panoply of challenges to TPR and affirms
Kenosha County DC&FS v. K.E.H., 2024AP1101, 2/26/25, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
In a dense and fact-dependent appeal stemming from a TPR jury trial, COA applies strict legal standards in order to reject the appellant’s multiple claims of ineffectiveness.
In published decision, COA holds that CR-215 procedure triggers attachment of right to counsel but denies relief given that law was “unsettled”
State v. Percy Antione Robinson, 2020AP1728-CR, 8/6/24, District I (recommended for publication); case activity
In a published decision that criminal practitioners have been waiting on for years, COA holds that a CR-215 probable cause procedure used to satisfy the requirements of Riverside triggers the attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
Circuit court properly granted summary judgment based on failure to respond to requests for admission and trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to respond
Kenosha County DC&FS v. A.G.O., 2023AP1305, 1307 & 1308, 5/8/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In yet another TPR case involving allegations of ineffective assistance, COA affirms based on hard-to-overcome legal standards.
COA holds that defendant’s misunderstanding about guilty plea waiver rule does not entitle him to plea withdrawal
State v. Matthew Robert Mayotte, 2022AP1695, 1/23/24, District 3 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Given the state of the postconviction record and COA’s narrow reading of precedent, Mayotte fails to establish he is entitled to plea withdrawal given his misunderstanding of the consequences of his Alford plea.
COA holds reasonable suspicion supported Act 79 search that may have led to burglary arrest
State v. Wayne L. Timm, 2023AP351, 1/19/24, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The police thought Timm might be responsible for a string of burglaries in the area, and so were looking out for his vehicle. When an officer spotted it one night, he pulled it over for going 31 in a 25. Shining his flashlight into the car, the officer saw the flat end of a tire iron such as could be used to pry things open; the iron was partly covered by a pair of jeans. He searched the vehicle and discovered more potentially “burglarious” tools. Based in part on this evidence, the police secured a GPS warrant for Timm’s car. The GPS tracking led to the discovery of evidence connecting him to specific burglaries. He moved to suppress the search of his car; when that was denied, he entered a plea.