On Point blog, page 302 of 483
TPR – “Bonding Expert”; Dispositional Phase Adjournment
State v. Henry W., 2011AP693, District 1, 6/7/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Henry W.: Jane S. Earle; case activity
Testimony of a “bonding expert” as to how the child’s view of her father would make it difficult for him to meet conditions of return, was relevant and admissible in the grounds phase, ¶¶5-7, 10.
Trial court’s refusal to grant adjournment of dispositional phase so that father could secure his own bonding expert,
OWI – Blood Test Admissibility
County of Brown v. Eric J. Schroeder, 2010AP2967, District 3, 6/7/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Schroeder: Dennis M. Melowski, Dennis M. Melowski; case activity
Following OWI arrest and blood test result over the limit, Schoeder’s license was administratively suspended. The police, however, failed to provide him with the form explaining the suspension review process, contrary to § 343.305(8)(am). Schroeder argues that this omission causes a loss of presumptive reliability of the blood test (which allows admission into evidence without expert testimony).
A Plague O’ Both Your Houses
Estate of Brianna Kriefall v. Sizzler USA Franchise, Inc., 2011 WI App 101
court of appeals decision (recommended for publication); case activity
¶24 n. 7:
On page 36 of its brief responding to Excel’s main appellate brief, E&B asserts: “[n]ot a single non-Kriefall [Pierringer] settlement agreement” is in the Record. That is not true, as Excel’s reply brief points out.
Search & Seizure: Consent to Search: Co-Occupant – Warrantless Entry: Probable Cause & Exigent Circumstances
State v. Deundra R. Lathan, 2011 WI App 104 (recommended for publication); for Lathan: George S. Tauscheck; case activity
Consent to Search, Co-Occupant
Consent to search premises given by one occupant overrides refusal to consent by co-occupant when neither is the subject of the search or ensuing arrest (resolving question expressly held open by Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103, 120 n.
Entitlement to Machner Hearing
State v. Jimmie C. Grayer, 2010AP1749-CR, District 1, 6/1/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Grayer: Bridget E. Boyle; case activity
Postconviction denial of ineffective assistance of counsel challenge without Machner hearing upheld.
1. Although counsel performed deficiently by inaccurately telling the jury in his opening statement that Grayer’s in-custody had not been recorded by the police, Grayer wasn’t prejudiced by the deficiency.
Sentencing – Discretion
State v. Dustin M. Przybylski, 2011AP1-CR, District 2, 6/1/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Przybylski: Michael S. Holzman; case activity
OWI sentence consecutive to unrelated 15-year sentence upheld, despite joint recommendations of concurrent time, against argument it was fashioned mechanistically rather than as exercise of discretion, State v. Martin, 100 Wis. 2d 326, 302 N.W.2d 58 (Ct. App.
SVP – Evidence re: Screening Process and Postcommitment Treatment
State v. Scott Maher, 2010AP460, District 4, 5/26/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Maher: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Testimony from a State’s expert witness describing the ch. 980 screening process was irrelevant.
¶11 We addressed the issue of the admissibility of this same type of evidence in State v. Sugden, 2010 WI App 166,
Possession with Intent to Deliver (THC) – Sufficiency of Evidence, PTAC; Stipulation – Element – Right to Jury Trial
State v. Roshawn Smith, 2010AP1192-CR, District 3, 5/26/11, aff’d and rev’d, 2012 WI 91
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, 2012 WI 91; for Smith: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Evidence held sufficient to support guilty verdict, § 961.41(1m)(h)5., ptac: after agreeing to accept packages (which turned out to contained marijuana),
OWI – Blood Test, § 343.305(5)(a), Generally; Request for Blood Test
City of Sun Prairie v. Michael H. Smith, 2010AP2607, District 4, 5/26/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Smith: Tracey A. Wood; case activity
¶9 Wisconsin Stat. § 343.305(5)(a) imposes the following obligations on law enforcement: “(1) to provide a primary test at no charge to the suspect; (2) to use reasonable diligence in offering and providing a second alternate test of its choice at no charge to the suspect;
Court of Appeals Publication Orders, 5/11
court of appeals publication orders, 5/26/11
On Point posts from this list:
2011 WI App 61 State v. Carl Cornelius Gilbert, Jr. / State v. Price T. Hunt
2011 WI App 63 State v. Darron D. Jackson
2011 WI App 64 State v. Michael D. Below
2011 WI App 66 State v. Herbert O. Richard
2011 WI App 68 Adam Martine v.