On Point blog, page 110 of 485
TPR court erred in granting partial summary judgment at grounds phase
Brown County DHHS v. L.F.H., Sr., 2019AP145, District 3, 4/23/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The County filed a petition to terminate L.F.H.’s parental rights based on a continuing denial of his periods of physical placement or visitation with his son, Leon (a pseudonym). The circuit court granted the County’s motion for summary judgment at the grounds phase, but that was error because the County failed to prove the CHIPS dispositional order satisfied the requirements of § 48.415(4).
TPR court had insufficient information to conclude it had jurisdiction
J.P. v. A.P., 2018AP1775 through 2018AP1778, District 4, 4/18/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In this unusual case, the court of appeals agrees with a parent in a TPR proceeding that the circuit court may not have subject matter jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act because of an order issued in another state governs custody of the children.
Alleged omissions from search warrant application didn’t invalidate warrant
State v. Calvin Lee Brown, 2018AP766-CR, District 1, 4/9/19 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Brown challenged a search warrant that was executed at his home, arguing the police omitted information about J.R.R., an informant who was cited in the warrant application, and that the information provided reason to doubt J.R.R.’s credibility. The court of appeals rejects the challenge.
Exclusionary rule applies to property forfeiture actions; but so does good faith exception
State v. Michael J. Scott, et al., 2019 WI App 22; case activity (including briefs)
Applying long-standing U.S. Supreme Court precedent, the court of appeals holds that the exclusionary rule can be used to defend against a civil forfeiture complaint filed by the state. But it also holds the state should have a shot at arguing the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule also applies, despite the state’s failure to assert this claim in the circuit court.
Summary judgment at TPR grounds phase reversed due to inadequate notice during CHIPS proceedings
Jackson County DHS v. R.H.H., Jr., 2018AP2440 to 208AP2443, District 4, 4/4/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
At the grounds phase R.H.H.’s termination of parental rights proceedings, the circuit court granted the County’s motion for summary judgment on the basis of continuing denial of visitation under § 48.415(4). Not so fast, says the court of appeals.
Officer had probable cause to arrest defendant for OWI after a 1-minute interaction with him
State v. Timothy Edward Curtis, 2018AP920-CR, 4/2/19, District 3, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The State charged Curtis with a 2nd offense OWI. He moved to suppress evidence obtained after his arrest on the grounds that the officer didn’t have probable cause for the arrest in the first place. He lost in the circuit court and in the court of appeals.
CoA rejects plea, ineffective assistance and new trial claims; affirms TPR order
State v. T.R.C., 2018AP820, 4/2/19, District 1 (1-judge opinion, eligible for publication); case activity
T.R.C. pled “no contest” to grounds for termination of her parental rights to D. On appeal she argued that her plea was not knowing, intelligent and voluntary, that her trial counsel was ineffective, and that the TPR order should be vacated in the interests of justice. The court of appeals affirmed.
March 2019 publication list
On March 27, 2019, the court of appeals ordered the publication of the following criminal law related cases:
Timothy W. Miller v. Angela L. Carroll, 2019 WI App 10 (judge’s acceptance of litigant’s Facebook “friend” request created appearance of bias)
State v. Kelly James Kloss, 2019 WI App 13 (Defense win on soliciting reckless injury versus soliciting recklessly endangering safety)
Unauthorized stay of sentence should be remedied by resentencing, not vacating of stay
State v. Caleb J. Hawley, 2018AP1601-CR, District 4, 3/28/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The judge who sentenced Hawley after revocation of probation stayed the sentence and ordered it to start some 14 months down the road, when Hawley would finished serving the 18 months of conditional jail time ordered in a different case. That stay was illegal, and the remedy is resentencing—not, as Hawley argues, credit for the time he was in custody since the day of his sentencing after revocation.
State may involuntarily medicate committed prisoners without finding them dangerous first
Winnebago County v. C.S., 2019 WI App 16, petition for review granted, 8/19/19; case activity
C.S., a mentally ill prisoner committed pursuant to §51.20(1)(ar), challenged the constitutionality of §51.61(1)(g) on its face and as applied because it allowed the government to medicate him against his will without finding him dangerous first. In a published decision, the court of appeals upholds the statute.