On Point blog, page 244 of 485
Anonymous tip naming defendant and officer’s own observations combined to support traffic stop
Manitowoc County v. Ryan A. Spatchek, 2013AP986, District 2, 9/25/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
An anonymous call to police dispatch said Spatchek was operating while intoxicated and that the caller was concerned for his safety and provided verifiable information as to Spatchek’s location that was later confirmed by a deputy who subsequently found and followed Spatchek and made independent observations of his impaired driving (crossing the fog line approximately three times in one mile;
Counsel was not ineffective for not calling a witness he thought was unpredictable and “less than credible”
State v. Alejandro Rodriguez, 2013AP695-CR, District 2, 9/25/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Trial counsel was not ineffective for deciding not to call Rodriguez’s girlfriend as a witness. Counsel advised Rodriguez he thought it was not in Rodriguez’s interests to have her testify because her recantations made her credibility suspect, she refused to talk to counsel before trial, and Rodriguez had a no-contact order pertaining to her,
Juvenile waiver decision is not invalidated even though juvenile could not be waived on one of the two cases on which waiver was based
State v. Jace H., 2012AP2479, District 2, 9/25/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The state petitioned to waive Jace H. into adult court in two delinquency cases involving allegations of sexual assault of two different victims. (¶¶2-4). After the circuit court granted the waiver petition, Jace’s new lawyer determined–and the state conceded–the allegations in one of the cases occurred before Jace turned 15, a fact that precludes waiver under § 938.18(1)(c) (juvenile court may waiver jurisdiction over juvenile alleged to have violated a criminal law on or after his 15th birthday).
Court’s deviation from the exact language of immigration warning in § 971.08(1)(c) doesn’t entitle defendant to plea withdrawal
State v. Ali Mursal, 2013 WI App 125; case activity
Before accepting a defendant’s guilty or no contest plea the court is required to advise the defendant there may be immigration consequences. Wis. Stat. § 971.08(1)(c). While that statute prescribes a text for the required warning—complete with quotation marks—the court of appeals holds in this case that a judge’s failure to repeat that language verbatim is not by itself grounds for plea withdrawal.
TPR — evidence of parent’s failure to meet conditions for return of other children under a CHIPS order in a different county
State v. Roberta W., 2013AP936, District 1, 9/24/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to evidence that Roberta W. had failed to meet the conditions for the return of two of her other children under a CHIPS order in a different county because that evidence was relevant under La Crosse County Dept. of Human Servs.
Court of appeals rejects use of collective knowledge doctrine to undercut reasonable suspicion
City of Stevens Point v. Katrina L. Shurpit, Appeal No. 2013AP538, 9/26/13; (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Shurpit challenged the investigative stop that led to her convictions for operating a vehicle with a prohibited alcohol content and while under the influence of an intoxicant. A hit-and-run had a occurred in the vicinity a few minutes before her stop. The dispatcher told the arresting officer that the car involved was gray or green.
State loses restitution appeal; proof of damages and nexus to crime is just too skimpy
State v. Deris Huley, 2013AP682, 9/26/13 (1-judge ineligible for publication); case activity
It’s not often the court of appeals rules against the State.
Huley pled no contest to a misdemeanor hit and run of an attended vehicle, as a repeater. See §346.74(5)(a). The State sought restitution in the amount of $4,064.83 for the victim’s personal injuries. Noting that “restitution is the rule and not the exception” and that “the victim need only show that the defendant’s actions were the precipitating cause of the injury and that [the injury] was the natural consequence of the actions,” the court of appeals nevertheless affirmed the denial of restitution.
Right to confront and present evidence; probative value of evidence outweighed by prejudicial effect, § 904.03
State v. Damon R. Lowe, 2012AP555-CR, District 2, 9/18/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Lowe, charged with sexual and physical abuse of V.A.L., his adopted daughter, sought to present evidence that she was motivated to fabricate her allegations because she wanted to get away from her overly strict father, who restricted her use of cell phones, her internet use, and her choice of friends.
More on probable cause to arrest for OWI
State v. George R. Ferrell, Appeal No. 2012AP2602, 9/26/13, (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
A state trooper does not need evidence such as odors, admissions or containers to have probable cause to arrest for OWI. These facts will do the trick:
¶12 . . . [T]he State Patrol received several reports that Ferrell was driving erratically and dangerously. Thiede observed that Ferrell was speeding and watched Ferrell swerve within his lane.
For intent to defraud case, no need to instruct jury on terms of contract authorizing defendant’s conduct
State v. Greg LaPean, 2012AP2309-CR, District 3, 9/26/13 (not recommended for publication); case activity
This case boils down to whether LaPean transferred encumbered farm equipment with intent to defraud his lender, Security State Bank, in violation of § 943.84(2)(a); Wis JI-Criminal 1470. LaPean asserted the real controversy was not tried due to an incomplete instruction on intent, there was insufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding of intent,