On Point blog, page 238 of 491
Officer’s approaching person on street and engaging him in conversation wasn’t a seizure
State v. Keith R. Friederick, 2013AP1609, District 4, 2/27/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Friederick was not seized by officer who approached him on the street and said sought to talk to him, applying United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980), along with State v. Griffith, 2000 WI 72, ¶53, 236 Wis.
Good-bye to Gerondale: Enhanced misdemeanor sentences are governed by the basic 75% and 25% rules
State v. Lee Thomas Lasanske, 2014 WI App 26; case activity
In a decision that may finally settle the issue of how to bifurcate enhanced misdemeanor sentences, the court of appeals holds that § 973.01(2)(c)1.’s prohibition against using an enhancer to increase a period of extended supervision does not apply to enhanced misdemeanor sentences. Instead, enhanced misdemeanor sentences are subject to the basic rules that the confinement portion of a bifurcated sentence may not exceed 75% of the total sentence,
Even if field sobriety tests constitute a “search” under the Fourth Amendment, police may request them based on reasonable suspicion of impairment
Village of Little Chute v. Ronald A. Rosin, 2013AP2536, District 3, 2/25/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Rosin argues that field sobriety tests are searches under the Fourth Amendment because “[a]n inherent right as a human being is to control and coordinate the actions of [his or her] own body[,]” and, therefore “a fundamental expectation of privacy is implicated when a person is subject to the performance of [field sobriety tests].” (¶12).
Good-faith exception to exclusionary rule precludes suppression of results of warrantless blood draw that was unlawful under Missouri v. McNeely
State v. William A. Reese, 2014 WI App 27; case activity
The results of a driver’s blood test should not be suppressed even if they were obtained without a warrant and in the absence of exigent circumstances in violation of Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013), because the arresting officer acted in good faith reliance on established Wisconsin Supreme Court precedent at the time the blood draw was conducted.
Presenting testimony of supervisor of analyst who tested blood sample instead of analyst herself didn’t violate Confrontation Clause
State v. Michael R. Griep, 2014 WI App 25, petition for review granted, 8/5/14, affirmed, 2015 WI 40; case activity
Griep’s right to confront the witnesses against him was not violated by allowing the supervisor of an unavailable lab analyst to testify to his opinion about the defendant’s BAC based entirely on the report prepared by the unavailable analyst.
Committed sex offender entitled to discharge hearing based on re-evaluation with updated actuarial
State v. Herbert O. Richard, 2014 WI App 28; case activity
Richard is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his petition for discharge because the independent psychologist’s opinion that amendments to the Static-99 show Richard’s risk to reoffend is below the legal threshold constitutes a fact on which a court or jury may conclude that Richard does not meet the criteria for commitment as a sexually violent person,
Statements to police during ambulance ride, and later while cuffed to bed in ICU, deemed voluntary
State v. Stanley K. Bullock, 2014 WI App 29, case activity
How “voluntary” does this sound to you?
The defendant was convicted of 1st-degree reckless homicide for the stabbing death of his girlfriend. He said that masked attackers broke into their apartment and stabbed him and his girlfriend. He called 911. The responding paramedics found the defendant conscious with stab wounds and his girlfriend dead. During his ambulance ride to the hospital (and while experiencing pain and disorientation),
Police lacked reasonable suspicion to seize driver of car in a parking lot suspected to be the site of illegal drug activity
State v. Chonsea Jerome King, 2013AP1068-CR, District 4, 2/13/14; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
A police officer saw a car parked in a lot linked by “numerous [pieces of] intelligence” to illegal drug activity. It was 9:25 p.m. The officer watched it for about five minutes, but did not see anyone exit the vehicle or any activity outside the vehicle, though they did observe the interior lights in the car turn on and off “a couple [of] times.” (¶3).
Conditionally admitting evidence during TPR grounds hearing when evidence was relevant only to disposition was harmless error
Dane County DHS v. Nancy M., 2013AP1886 & 2013AP1887, District 4, 2/13/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity: 2013AP1886; 2013AP1887
During the first day of a fact-finding hearing to the court to determine whether there were grounds to terminate Nancy’s parental rights, the trial court admitted evidence about Nancy’s bonding with her two children. Nancy objected, and the County and GAL agreed the line of questioning was not relevant to the grounds phase of the TPR proceeding,
Trial counsel’s performance at TPR trial, if deficient, was not prejudicial
Aaron W.M. v. Britany T.H., 2013AP2123, District 4, 2/13/14; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Britany claimed trial counsel was ineffective for not objecting to: 1) hearsay testimony from the child’s father that related incidents of Britany’s bad parenting; and 2) the petitioner’s “golden rule” rule argument during closing, which asked the jurors to view the case as if the child were their own, thus improperly asking the jurors to “internalize and personalize the case,