On Point blog, page 39 of 70
Statute of limitations, § 939.74(1) — sufficiency of “John Doe” complaint’s identification of defendant for purposes of tolling statute of limitations; denial of right to self-representation or to substitution of counsel
State v. Rodney Washington, 2012AP1015-CR, District 1, 3/26/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Statute of limitations, § 939.74(1) — sufficiency of “John Doe” complaint’s identification of defendant for purposes of tolling statute of limitations
The crimes in this case—sexual assault and robbery—were alleged to have occurred in 1994 and 1995. In 2000, eleven days before the statute of limitations was to run,
TPR – opinion testimony by case manager
State v. Gloria C., 2012AP1693 and 2012AP1694, District 1, 2/5/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the opinion testimony of the parent’s ongoing case manager, who said that based on the parent’s conduct in the preceding two years, she would not be able to meet the conditions necessary for the return of her children within nine months.
Ineffective assistance of counsel; “new factor” based sentence modification
State v. Stephen Lehman, 2011AP2821-CR, District I (not recommended for publication). Case activity.
Lehman pled guilty to 2 counts of burglary of a dwelling. The trial court sentenced him to 5 years of initial confinement and 3 years of extended supervision for each count. The court ran the sentences consecutively, ordered Lehman to pay $1,700 in restitution, and declared him ineligible for the Challenge Incarceration and Earned Release programs.
Confession – consideration of truthfulness of confession when deciding voluntariness
State v. Douglas H. Stream, Case No. 2011AP2051, District 1, 1/29/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
The circuit court properly denied the defendant’s Wis. Stat. § 974.06 postconviction motion, which claimed that his trial lawyer was ineffective for not objecting to references to the truthfulness of his confession during a Goodchild hearing to determine voluntariness of the confession and that his postconviction lawyer was ineffective for failing to challenge his trial lawyer’s effectiveness.
Denial of right to self-representation — competence to represent oneself; search and seizure — probable cause, automobile exception
State v. Robert L. Tatum, Case No. 2011AP2439-CR, District 1, 1/29/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Denial of right to self-representation – competence to represent oneself
The circuit court properly denied Tatum the right to represent himself based on his limited education and understanding of legal procedures, as evidenced by his statements and behavior in court. (¶13). While the circuit court found Tatum competent to proceed under Wis.
Sherry Burt, Warden v. Vonlee Titlow, USSC 12-414, cert granted 2/25/13
This case presents three questions involving· AEDPA (the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996), and Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376 (2012), this Court’s recent decision expanding ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims to include rejected plea offers:
1. Whether the Sixth Circuit failed to give appropriate deference to a Michigan state court under AEDPA in holding that defense counsel was constitutionally ineffective for allowing Respondent to maintain his claim of innocence.
Ineffective assistance of counsel – failure to object to admission of, and expert opinion based on, autopsy reports prepared by another pathologist; failure to object to evidence of prior felony convictions
State v. Willie M. McDougle, 2013 WI App 43; case activity
Failure to object to admission of, and expert opinion based on, autopsy reports prepared by another pathologist
Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object on confrontation clause grounds to either the opinion testimony of the pathologist who did not conduct autopsy or the reports of pathologist who did conduct the autopsy because any failure to object was not prejudicial:
¶17 …[T]rial counsel’s decision not to object to Dr.
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,
Probation search declared unreasonable; forfeiting issue could be ineffective assistance of counsel
State v. Jeremiah J. Purtell, 2012AP1307-CR, District 2, 3/7/13 (not recommended for publication); petition for review granted 11/20/13. Case activity.
This case concerns a probation agent’s search of the defendant’s computers. Following a conviction for 2 counts of animal cruelty, a court placed the defendant on probation and imposed a condition that he not own or possess a computer.
Habeas Review – Issue Unaddressed by State Court; Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Martin Woolley v. Rednour, 7th Cir No. 10-3550, 12/14/12
Habeas Review – Issue Left Unaddressed by State Court
Where, on state (Illinois) postconviction review of an IAC claim, the trial court ruled that counsel’s performance had been deficient but not prejudicial, and the state appellate court affirmed solely on the basis of prejudice without reaching deficient performance, habeas review of counsel’s performance is de novo (that is,