On Point blog, page 3 of 485
Defense Win: Court commissioner lacked authority to conduct trial in traffic forfeiture case
Waushara County v. Beatrice Bruning, 2025AP300, 8/7/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
In a case with a slightly convoluted procedural history, COA accepts the County’s concession that traffic citations are invalid as they resulted from a trial conducted before a court commissioner instead of a circuit court judge.
COA: Sufficient evidence to convict for OWI on a “highway” where intoxicated driver found in the driver’s seat of his truck while parked in a ditch.
State of Wisconsin v. Robert W. Berghuis, 2025AP134-CR, District II, 8/6/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed a jury’s guilty verdict for operating a vehicle while intoxicated, finding the evidence was sufficient that the driver operated the vehicle on a “highway” when law enforcement encountered the driver in the driver’s seat of his truck that was parked in a ditch.
COA approves what appears to be the 20th extension of an involuntary mental commitment order despite doctor’s “concerns” about medication regimen
Racine County v. D.S. 2025AP758-FT, 8/6/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
COA rejects a battery of challenges to D.S.’s involuntary commitment and medication despite sharing some of the examining physician’s “concerns” about her situation.
COA holds that “exonerated” inmate has not proven his innocence in order to obtain statutory compensation
Mario Victoria Vasquez v. State of Wisconsin Claims Board, 2023AP1764, 8/5/25, District III (not recommended for publication); case activity
In a rare appeal focusing on the statutory right to compensation for the wrongly convicted, COA holds that Vasquez–despite having been freed from prison–cannot prove his innocence in this unique administrative forum.
COA affirms verdict finding grounds to terminate parental rights for failing to assume parental responsibilities.
Taylor County Human Services v. A.B., 2025AP633, 2025AP634, 2025AP635, 2025AP636, 7/29/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirms the circuit court’s orders terminating “Adam’s” parental rights, while emphasizing the heavy burden placed on the party seeking to overturn a jury’s verdict.
COA affirms order continuing protective placement
Racine County v. R.P.L., 2025AP813-FT, 7/30/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
In an appeal from an annual protective placement review, R.P.L. escapes a finding of mootness but loses on the merits.
Defense win: Circuit court erred when it denied respondent’s request for fact witnesses to appear in person at ch. 51 trial
Washburn County v. L.R.Y., 2025AP272-FT, District 3, 7/22/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
“Lily” appeals an original commitment and involuntary med order, arguing that the circuit court violated her right to have the County’s fact witnesses testify in person. COA agrees that, under Wis. Stat. § 885.60(2)(d), the circuit court erred by failing to sustain Lily’s objection to the county’s fact witnesses appearing by video at the final hearing.
COA rejects undeveloped challenges to speeding citation and affirms
County of Milwaukee v. Sharon A. Dawson, 2024AP584, 7/22/25, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
Although Dawson challenges the actions of the Milwaukee Police in enforcing the traffic code as racial profiling, her her pro se arguments are too poorly pleaded for the Court to address them.
COA calculates discharge date on sentences for crimes committed between 1999 and 2003 in published case.
State of Wisconsin ex rel. Christopher P. Kawleski v. State, 2022AP1129, 7/3/25, District IV, (recommended for publication); case activity
COA recommends publication in a case addressing how to calculate the maximum discharge date for a defendant sentenced to a bifurcated sentence on a felony between 1999 and 2003 upon release from reconfinement after extended supervision was revoked.
COA holds that protective placement may be continued based on evidence from previous hearings provided the evidence was “adjudicated.”
Pierce County v. P.C.A., 2024AP1367, 7/1/25, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
While affirming the circuit court continuing a protective placement order under Chapter 55 after a due process hearing (known as a Watts hearing), the COA clarified that, following previous due process hearings, documentary evidence that was admitted, and testimony that was accepted by the circuit court and incorporated into its findings, may be considered at subsequent due process hearings.