On Point blog, page 157 of 485
Adult court had jurisdiction, competency to adjudicate offenses committed before defendant was age 10
State v. Shaun M. Sanders, 2017 WI App 22, petition for review granted 6/13/17, affirmed, 2018 WI 51; case activity (including briefs)
When Sanders was 19 years old he was charged with committing repeated sexual assaults of H.S. during a time period when he was aged 9 to 12 and H.S. was aged 7 to 9. He asserts the circuit court had neither subject matter jurisdiction nor competency to proceed on those charges because under §§ 938.02(3m), 938.12(1), and 938.183(1)(am) persons who commit criminal acts when they are under the age of 10 are not subject to the juvenile justice code or the criminal code. The court of appeals rejects the claim.
Partial TPR summary judgment upheld
Racine County HSD v. R.E., 2016AP2039, 3/15/2017, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The record supported the circuit court’s grant of partial summary judgment on grounds of abandonment because there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether R.E. had failed to visit or communicate with her child, S.E., for a period of three or more months, § 48.415(1)(a)2.
Nine IAC claims; none succeed
State v. Randy Allen Lapp, 2016AP116-CR, 3/7/17, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Randy Lapp’s ineffective assistance claims are numerous and diverse, and the court of appeals quickly disposes of them. To wit:
Overlooking eligibility for expungement at sentencing isn’t a “new factor”
State v. Diamond J. Arberry, 2017 WI App 26, petition for review granted 6/16/17, affirmed, 2018 WI 7 ; case activity (including briefs)
Because a circuit court must decide whether to grant expungement under § 973.015 “at the sentencing proceeding,” State v. Matasek, 2014 WI 27, ¶45, 353 Wis. 2d 601, 846 N.W.2d 811, the court doesn’t have authority to consider expungement when it asked to do so in a defendant’s postconviction motion.
Juvenile waiver decision upheld
State v. T.L.J., 2016AP1395, District 2, 3/8/2017 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in granting the state’s petition to waive T.L.J. into adult court to face charges of armed robbery and operating a motor vehicle without owner’s consent.
Court of Appeals: traffic on East Courtland must yield to traffic on North Hopkins
State v. Randolph Arthur Mantie, 2015AP2443-CR, 3/7/17, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
As the court notes, the relevant events in this case took place at a “hard-to-describe intersection” so here’s a visual aid.
Plea withdrawal claims rejected
State v. Erika Lisette Gutierrez, 2014AP1983-CR, 3/7/2017 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Gutierrez pleaded guilty to intentional physical abuse of a trial and had a bench trial on her plea of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. She asserts she should be allowed to withdraw her guilty plea because the circuit court didn’t give the full § 971.08(1)(c) immigration warning and because her plea was premised on incorrect advice from her lawyer. The court of appeals disagrees.
Convictions for battery, violation of no contact order upheld
State v. Earnest Lee Nicholson, 2015AP2154-CR & 2015AP2155-CR, 3/7/2017, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Nicholson challenges the validity of the no-contact order he was convicted of violating, and also argues his rights to confrontation and to testify were violated. The court of appeals rejects his claims.
Confession to attempted homicide does not convert police interview into custodial interrogation
State v. Daniel J.H. Bartelt, 2017 WI App 23, petition for review granted 6/15/17, affirmed, 2018 WI 16, ; case activity (including briefs)
During a police interview about an attempted homicide, Bartelt made incriminating statements and then unequivocally invoked his right to counsel. A few minutes later, police arrested him. The next day, different officers advised Bartelt of his Miranda rights, which he waived before confessing to a murder. The issue is whether Bartelt was in custody when he invoked his right to counsel during the first interview.
Cop had reasonable suspicion to perform FSTs based on time of stop and smell of alcohol
City of Waukesha v. Derek R. Pike, 2016AP1720, 3/1/17, District 2 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A police officer stopped Pike at 1:00 a.m. because his car lacked a front license plate. The officer smelled alcohol, and Pike admitted that he was coming from a nightclub where he had consumed 1 or 2 beers. The officer conducted FSTs, and the results caused him to request blood chemical tests, which Pike refused.