On Point blog, page 2 of 490
COA holds that costs to investigate crime are recoverable as restitution, but not attorney fees.
State of Wisconsin v. Mary E. Melstrom, 2023AP1176-CR, 2/17/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed a restitution award to cover the victim insurance company’s costs of investigating the cause of a house fire that was the subject of the defendant’s criminal charge but reversed the award for the victim’s attorney fees.
Defense win: COA upholds jury’s verdict in favor of TPR respondent
J.R.P. v. W.P.M., 2024AP1535, 2/19/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
In a rare sufficiency challenge pursued by the petitioner, COA applies a deferential standard of review and affirms.
COA finds there was sufficient evidence of obstructing and affirms
State v. Kyle R. Appel, 2023AP2083-CR, 2/17/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
Applying a standard of review exceptionally deferential to a jury’s decision to convict, COA distinguishes Appel’s proffered authority and affirms.
COA rejects challenge to TPR dispositional order and affirms
State v. L.Z., 2025AP2731-32, 2/17/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
Although L.Z. tries to capitalize on certain statements in the court’s oral ruling as giving a foothold for her appellate challenge, the standard of review means the argument attacking a discretionary decision goes nowhere.
COA rejects challenges to discretionary restitution order and affirms
State v. Tate H. Batson, 2025AP136-CR, 2/12/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
Although Batson tries his best to poke holes in the judge’s discretionary decision, the deferential standard of review means those arguments uniformly fail.
COA finds that county failing to timely file annual review of protective placement does not deprive the circuit court of competency.
Department on Aging v. J.J., 2024AP1850, 2/10/26, District I (recommended for publication); case activity
The COA held in a decision recommended for publication that the deadline for counties to file the annual review of a person subject to protective placement is directory and failing to file timely does not deprive the circuit court of competency, while reminding parties that timely annual review remains statutorily and constitutionally required.
COA holds that exclusionary rule does not apply to evidence of defendant’s flight from police after traffic stop was allegedly unlawfully extended.
State of Wisconsin v. Alsherrife Mire, 2024AP2481-CR, 2/4/26, District II (recommended for publication); case activity
In a decision recommended for publication, the COA affirmed the circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress the fruits of his allegedly unlawfully extended traffic stop because evidence of his flight from police was not derived from the stop.
COA finds sufficient evidence of dangerousness and affirms protective placement
Brown County v. M.S., 2025AP1532, 2/3/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
In yet another appeal focusing on Chapter 55’s dangerousness criterion, COA holds that while the County could have done a better job at this hearing, the evidence passes muster on appeal.
COA affirms circuit court’s finding of reasonable suspicion for traffic stop resulting in OWI 3rd
State v. Troy A. Wry, 2023AP561, 2/3/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
Wry appeals his conviction for OWI 3rd, arguing the circuit court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence because law enforcement lacked reasonable suspicion that Wry had committed, or was committing, an offense sufficient to conduct an investigatory stop of his vehicle. COA affirms.
Defense Win: COA, in decision recommended for publication, finds reverse waiver statute unconstitutional
State v. Noah Q. Mann-Tate, 2024AP2585-CR, 2/3/26, District I (recommended for publication); case activity
In a massively consequential decision, COA reaffirms the uniqueness of children facing criminal charges and finds our notoriously-stringent reverse waiver statute unconstitutional as a result.