On Point blog, page 120 of 487
FST results provided probable cause for OWI arrest
Grant County v. Kenneth Jay Raney, Sr., 2018AP700, 12/6/18, District 4, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
A jury convicted Raney of IWI, 1st offense. On appeal, he represented himself, which caused the court of appeals a lot of frustration. Opinion, ¶2. It rejected most of his arguments as being forfeited, undeveloped, or contradicted by the record. His one preserved argument–whether the field sobriety test results established probable cause–failed on the merits.
Due process challenge fails; counties and courts needn’t specify dangerousness standard justifying Chapter 51 commitment
Milwaukee County v. T.L.R., 2018AP1131, 12/4/18, District 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication), case activity
Here’s an issue of first impression for SCOW. Lessard v. Schmidt, 349 F. Supp. 1078, 1092 (E.D. Wis. 1972) established procedural and substantive due process rights for persons undergoing mental commitments. One of those rights is the right to particularized notice of the basis for detention, including, the legal standard upon which the person is detained. Id. at 1092. T.L.R didn’t receive that notice.
CHIPS proceedings not precluded by prior JIPS proceedings
Fond du Lac County DSS & W.A.B. v. W.G.B. & K.L.B., 2017AP2468, 12/5/18, District 2 (one-judge decison; ineligible for publication); case activity
W.A.B., a juvenile, was alleged to be delinquent for threatening her mother with a knife. She was found not competent to proceed, though, and so DSS filed a JIPS petition. See Wis. Stat. § 938.13(14). That petition resulted in an order placing W.A.B. outside the home, to have contact with her sister only when the family’s counselor thought it appropriate.
November 2018 publication list
On November 28, 2018, the court of appeals ordered the publication of the following criminal law related decision:
State v. Matthew C. Hinkle, 2018 WI App 67 (juvenile court’s waiver into adult court binds all future courts)
October 2018 publication list
On October 31, 2018, the court of appeals ordered the publication of the following criminal law related decision:
State v. Ronald Lee Baric, 2018 WI App 63 (defendant consented to search of his computer and had no expectation of privacy in files put on P2P file sharing network)
COA holds, over dissent, that OWI fine enhancers enhance each other
State v. Charles L. Neill, IV, 2019 WI App 4; petition for review granted 6/11/19, reversed, 2020 WI 15; case activity (including briefs)
Neill pleaded to an OWI-3rd, which has a minimum fine of $600. Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2)(am)3. His plea came with two statutory enhancers: the one for having a BAC over .25 (Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2)(g)3.), and the one for having a child in a car (§ 346.65(2)(f)2.). The former quadruples the minimum fine, and the latter doubles it. So, what’s the minimum fine?
Challenges to termination of parental rights rejected
State v. J.A., 2018AP1257, District 1, 12/4/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
J.A.’s parental rights were terminated on the ground he failed to assume parental responsibility. He argues the CHIPS order itself created a substantial parental relationship, thereby precluding the state from using that ground to terminate his rights. Alternatively, he argues the CHIPS order made it impossible for him to assume parental responsibility. Neither argument succeeds.
Ineffective assistance claim fails for lack of prejudice; postconviction discovery motion denied for seeking “inconsequential” Facebook records
State v. Steven L. Buckingham, 2017AP1852-CR, 12/4/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication), case activity (including briefs).
When the court of appeals’ dismisses an appellant’s arguments on the grounds that they are “conclusory,” it’s always wise to check the briefs. In this case, Buckingham filed a fully-developed, well-organized 42-page brief in chief presenting 5 claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and a claim for post-conviction discovery.
Evidence sufficient to to support “failure to assume parental responsibility” finding in TPR appeal
State v. R.H., 2018AP1827, District 1, 12/4/18 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
The standard of review doomed this appeal, which argued that there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court’s finding that R.H. failed to assume parental responsibility during the grounds phase of a TPR.
Mother’s testimony didn’t vouch for daughter’s honesty in violation of Haseltine rule
State v. Frederick Eugene Walker, 2018AP186-CR, District 1, 11/27/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Walker challenges his child sexual assault conviction, arguing the complaining witness’s mother improperly vouched for her daughter’s honesty. He also argues the trial court wrongly excluded evidence of the complaining witness’s sexual activity with another person. The court of appeals rejects his claims.