On Point blog, page 282 of 484
Court of Appeals Publication Orders, 2/12
court of appeals publication orders, 2/29/12
On Point posts from this list:
2012 WI App 14 State v. Demian Hyden McDermott
2012 WI App 15 State v. Anrietta M. Geske
2012 WI App 21 State v. James Lee Johnson
2012 WI App 25 State v. Dylan S. / Renee B.
Ineffective Assistance – Sentencing; Failure to Request Substitution
State v. Miller X. Lark-Holland, 2011AP791-CR, District 1, 2/28/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Lark-Holland: Byron C. Lichstein; case activity
¶7 Lark-Holland’s first complaint is that his trial lawyer did not emphasize the mitigating factor that he said he was forced into committing the robbery, and also made several comments that he says undercut his character. … These comments, however, when read in full context,
Ineffective Assistance – Prejudice; Trial Court Exercise of Discretion – Over-Reliance on Party’s Submission
State v. Juan Angel Orengo, 2011AP137, District 1, 2/28/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Orengo: Robert R. Henak; case activity
Counsel’s failure to attempt severance, from a drug charge, of a felon-in-possession-of-weapon count, didn’t amount to ineffective assistance.
¶8 Wisconsin law recognizes that guns and drug dealers go together. See State v. Guy, 172 Wis. 2d 86,
TPR – Default Judgment as to Grounds – Sufficiency of Evidence; § 48.415(6) – Constitutional Challenge, Vagueness
Dane Co. DHS v. Sophia S., 2011AP2639, District 4, 2/23/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Sophia S.: Faun M. Moses; case activity
Although the parent isn’t required to object to the sufficiency of evidence adduced in support of a default judgment on grounds for termination (the court rejecting the County’s argument on this point), there was a sufficient factual basis for the default.
Carrying Concealed Weapon: Definition of “Dangerous Weapon” re: “Operated by Force of Gunpowder”
State v. Sean T. Powell, 2012 WI App 33 (recommended for publication); for Powell: Richard L. Kaiser; case activity
Conviction for CCW, § 941.23, requires proof of a “dangerous weapon,” which is in turn defined under § 939.22(10) to include “any firearm.” The pattern instruction, Wis JI-Criminal 910 embellishes the definition: “A firearm is a weapon that acts by force of gunpowder.” Powell argues that, because the State failed to show that his loaded,
Reasonable Suspicion – Reliability of Information
State v. Anthony J. Wilson, 2011AP1782-CR, District 4, 2/16/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wilson: Joseph F. Fischer; case activity
A known citizen-informant’s report of a hit-and-run collision he observed, including pointing out the vehicle as it fled the scene, was sufficiently reliable to support reasonable suspicion for a stop, notwithstanding an inaccurate detail in the report (the vehicle’s color).
¶24 While not controlling here,
Reasonable Suspicion – Collective Knowledge Doctrine; Traffic Stop – Report of Intoxicated Driver
State v. Sherri A. Wittrock, 2011AP1538-CR, District 2, 2/15/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wittrock: Steven D. Grunder, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
¶7 Where, as here, an officer relies on information provided by dispatch, “reasonable suspicion is assessed by looking at the collective knowledge of police officers.” See State v. Pickens, 2010 WI App 5,
Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop – Crossing Fog Line
State v. Jordan T. Griffith, 2011AP2226-CR, District 2, 2/15/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Griffith: Walter Arthur Piel, Jr.; case activity
¶5 In order for an investigatory stop to be justified by reasonable suspicion, the officer must have a “‘particularized and objective basis’ for suspecting the person stopped of criminal activity.” State v. Walli, 2011 WI App 86,
TPR – Grounds, Sufficiency of Evidence; TPR – Termination Phase, Exercise of Discretion
State v. Marquis O., 2011AP2642, District 1, 2/14/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Marquis O.: Carl W. Chessir; case activity
Grounds for terminating parental rights upheld, against argument that Bureau of Child Welfare didn’t make reasonable effort to provide services for Marquis O. to meet conditions for child’s return to him.
¶5 The termination of Marquis O.’s parental rights to Mariyana was based on the child’s having,
State v. Gerald D. Taylor, 2011AP1030-CR, District 3/4, 2/9/12, review granted
court of appeals certification; for Taylor: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; review granted, 3/15/12
Guilty Pleas – Plea Colloquy
Certified Issue:
Whether a plea colloquy’s understating the potential penalty is subject to harmless error analysis, such that if the subsequently-imposed sentence doesn’t exceed the misadvised maximum, plea-withdrawal isn’t supported.
The details: Taylor was charged as a repeater with an offense carrying an underlying maximum of 6 years with the enhancer adding a potential 2 years.