On Point blog, page 110 of 484
Officer’s testimony about defendant’s evasive behavior during interview okay under Haseltine
State v. Edward L. Branson, 2018AP873-CR, 3/21/19, District 4 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Branson was convicted of possession with intent to deliver methamphetamine. He argued that his lawyer was ineffective for failing to object to an officer’s testimony comparing his behavior to that of the passenger in his car where a bag of meth was found. The officer described the passenger as calm, helpful and willing to look him in the eye. In contrast, he described Branson as nervous and failing to make eye contact.
Defendant’s travelling to Wisconsin to commit crime was not improper sentencing factor
State v. Marshawn Terell Johnson, 2017AP2445-CR, District 3, 3/19/19 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
In sentencing Johnson for possession of heroin with intent to delivery, the circuit court remarked that he’d traveled to Superior from Chicago to commit his crime. The sentencing court’s consideration of that fact did not violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U. S. Constitution.
Trial counsel wasn’t deficient in cross examining complaining witness
State v. Harvey A. Talley, 2018AP786-CR, 2018AP787-CR, & 2018AP788-CR, District 1, 3/19/19 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Talley, who was convicted of first degree sexual assault causing pregnancy in violation of § 940.225(1)(a), argues trial counsel was ineffective for failing to elicit testimony from A.D., the complainant, the reasons why she initially falsely alleged Talley had forcible, nonconsensual sex with her. The court of appeals holds trial counsel’s strategy in questioning A.D. was reasonable.
Guilty plea waiver rule +failure to respond = no decision on the merits
State v. Daniel W. Morse, 2018AP1293-CR, District 1, 3/19/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Morse challenges his convictions for three counts of misdemeanor theft by embezzlement, but the court of appeals holds he’s waived his challenges by pleading guilty.
Sentencing challenges rejected
State v. Angela L. Staten, 2018AP1506-CR, District 1, 3/19/19 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Staten and her two co-defendants engaged in a course of tax fraud that netted them over $200,000 in tax refunds that didn’t belong to them. Staten, the first of the three sentenced, argues that her sentence was unduly harsh compared to her co-defendants’ sentences and that the sentencing court erroneously exercised its discretion in changing its mind at the very end and ordering prison rather than probation on two of the counts. The court of appeals rejects her challenges.
Pressure to plead to get out of jail didn’t amount to fair and just reason for plea withdrawal
State v. Arttistis B. Hall, 2018AP1522-CR, District 1, 3/19/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
After failing to comply with a family court child placement order, Hall was charged with two felony counts of interference with child custody; he ultimately pled to a reduced charge of contempt of court. (¶¶2-3). Though he expressed his displeasure with the situation, he got through what appears to be a pretty thorough plea colloquy. (¶¶4-6). Before sentencing he moved to withdraw his plea, but the court of appeals holds he didn’t show a fair and just reason for plea withdrawal.
Failure to impeach, newly discovered evidence don’t merit new trial
State v. Rondale Darmon Tenner, 2018AP1115-CR, District 1, 3/12/19 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Tenner complains his lawyer was ineffective for failing to impeach one of the state’s witnesses with her prior convictions. He also says he should get a new trial because he has an affidavit from a new witness who says another state’s witness actually committed the crime pinned on Tenner. The court of appeals disagrees.
Newly discovered evidence claim rejected
State v. Jerry Simone Wilson, 2018AP534, District 1, 3/12/19 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Wilson’s bid for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence fails because he was negligent for not seeking the evidence at the time of his original trial.
TPR attorney wasn’t ineffective; but circuit court erred in refusing to hold dispositional hearing
S.D. v. A.V., 2018AP1150, District 4, 3/7/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
S.D. petitioned to terminate the parental rights of A.V., her ex-husband, after he was convicted and sent to prison for possession of child pornography. The court of appeals affirms the unfitness finding but remands for a dispositional hearing.
TPR based on prior child abuse conviction wasn’t unconstitutional
Racine County HSD v. L.R.H.-J., 2018AP2065, District 2, 3/6/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
L.R.H.-J. was convicted of child neglect in causing the death of her first child in 2005. In 2015 she had another child, “Baby J,” who was immediately taken from her and a CHIPS proceeding commenced. In 2017 her rights to Baby J were terminated, after the circuit court granted summary judgment at the grounds phase, citing §48.415(9m). The court of appeals rejects facial and as-applied constitutional challenges to the use of that statute against her with respect to Baby J.