On Point blog, page 2 of 485
COA orders new trial in CHIPS proceeding because circuit court excluded evidence that respondent executed power of attorney to guarantee child’s care while she was in custody
State v. A.C.S, 2024AP1634, 9/10/25, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA reversed the circuit court’s dispositional order entered after a jury found “Anna’s” child was in need of protection or services (CHIPS) and ordered a new trial because the court excluded evidence that Anna executed a power of attorney to guarantee the child’s care while she was in custody.
COA affirms order denying child’s request for change of placement in CHIPS case
Sheboygan County DH & HS v. N.H. & E.H., 2025AP903-FT, 9/10/25, District 2 (one-judge decison; ineligible for publication); case activity
“Luke” appeals from an order denying his request to change his placement back to his father’s home in a CHIPS case. COA affirms.
COA affirms TPR orders, concludes that trial counsel’s performance was not deficient and circuit court properly excluded evidence related to a younger child
State v. M.W., 2025AP2364 &2365 , 9/3/25, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
M.W. appeals the orders terminating her parental rights to two of her children, “Liam” and “Karen,” and the order denying her motion for postdisposition relief. She argues that her trial counsel was ineffective when by failing object to multiple instances of hearsay, and her due process
rights were violated when the court ruled that she could not introduce evidence at trial that another child remained in her care. COA affirms.
COA rejects hearsay and D.J.W. challenges to ch. 51 commitment
Grant County v. T.L.M., 2025AP500, 8/28/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
T.L.M. challenges her recommitment, arguing that the circuit court erroneously admitted hearsay evidence over her objection, and that the court failed to make the required factual findings to support the commitment. COA concludes that although the circuit court erroneously admitted some hearsay, the error was harmless, and that the circuit court satisfied the demands of Langlade County v. D.J.W., 2020 WI 41, 391 Wis. 2d 231, 942 N.W.2d 277.
COA holds blood draw results admissible under independent source doctrine
State v. Michael R. Meton, 2025AP141-CR, 8/27/25, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Meton challenges the judgment convicting him of operating with a prohibited alcohol content, 2nd offense. He argues that the circuit court erred in denying his motion to suppress the blood result after police administered a preliminary breath test without first asking for his consent. COA agrees with the circuit court that suppression of the blood draw because police had independent grounds apart from the PBT to arrest Meton on suspicion of operating while intoxicated.
COA: Defendant forfeits argument for discovery violation because no objection made at trial
State v. Rebecca Lea Kamm, 2024AP1944-CR, 8/28/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA held that the defendant forfeited her argument that the State did not comply with Wis. Stat. § 971.23(1) by not disclosing to her counsel video evidence within a reasonable time before trial. Although the evidence was not provided to counsel until the morning of trial, the issue was forfeited because counsel did not object to its admission.
COA rejects challenges to involuntary commitment and medication orders
Brown County v. M.J., 2025AP116, 8/26/25, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
In a Chapter 51 appeal presenting familiar legal challenges, COA avoids some of the stickier legal issues on a path toward affirmance.
Defense wins: COA reverses protective placement due to insufficiency of the evidence
Wood County v. J.A.B., 2025AP220, 8/21/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA reversed the circuit court’s order for protective placement because the County did not establish that J.A.B. was so totally incapable of providing for her own care as to create a substantial risk of serious harm to herself or others.
COA rejects “impermissible extension” challenge to traffic stop in OWI appeal
Fond du Lac County v. Andrew Joseph Ludwig, 2025AP183, 8/20/25, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Ludwig appeals from a judgment convicting him of OWI 1st, and challenges the order denying his suppression motion. He contends that the sheriff deputies “unconstitutionally detain[ed him]” by failing to conduct the OWI investigation in a sufficiently diligent manner. COA disagrees and affirms.
COA rejects arguments that admission to grounds was not knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered, factual basis was insufficient, and trial counsel was ineffective in TPR appeal
Crawford County v. M.W., 2025AP302, 8/14/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
Despite concluding that M.W.’s plea colloquy was “lacking in certain respects” on the circuit court’s part, COA holds that the record supports the court’s postdisposition conclusion that M.W. knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered his admission. COA also rejects M.W.’s arguments that the county failed to establish a factual basis and that trial counsel was ineffective.