On Point blog, page 312 of 485
Terry Stop
City of Mequon v. Monica Maureen Cooley, 2010AP2142, District 2, 2/23/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Cooley: Dudley A. Williams; case activity
Reasonable suspicion supported early-morning stop of car in otherwise empty parking lot.
¶7 We agree with the circuit court that Brandemuehl conducted a lawful Terry stop. Brandemuehl could point to specific and articulable facts[3] (Cooley turning into the parking lot of a closed movie theatre early on New Year’s morning),
Ch. 51 Recommitment – “if treatment were withdrawn” test explained and met here
Waukesha County v. Kathleen R. H., 2010AP2571-FT, District 2, 2/23/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Kathleen R.H.: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
The evidence supported ch. 51 mental health recommitment for a period of 12 months.
¶8 Here, Kathleen misconstrues WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(am) as requiring proof, apart from that contained in her treatment record, that she would be a danger to herself or others if treatment were withdrawn.
TPR – Grounds
Walworth County DH&HS v. Andrea O., 2010AP2938, District 2, 2/23/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Andrea O.: Suzanne L. Hagopian, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Evidence supported jury verdict on abandonment as to grounds for terminating parental rights, as against claim of good cause (incarceration) for conceded failure to communicate with the child.
¶8 The record reflects that Andrea may have sent a letter to her caseworker,
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel – Voluntary Intoxication; Ineffective Assistance – State’s Closing Argument
State v. Richard L. Daniels, 2010AP1715-CR, District 3, 2/23/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Daniels: John M. Carroll; case activity
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel – Voluntary Intoxication
Voluntary intoxication requires that the defendant establish utter lack of capability to form the requisite intent; because Daniels’ version couldn’t make this showing, counsel’s failure to pursue the defense wasn’t deficient performance.
¶12 It was reasonable for Daniels’ trial counsel to view Daniels’ version of events as inconsistent with a voluntary intoxication defense,
Chs. 51 / 55 – Placement at Mendota
Rock County v. Donald G., 2010AP2444, District 4, 2/17/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Donald G.: Steven D. Grunder, SPD, Madson Appellate; case activity
Concededly proper placement at Mendota under concurrent chs. 51 (mental health commitment) and 55 (protective placement) needn’t account for future termination should ch. 51 commitment later be amended. The placement order complies with § 55.18(3)(e)(1), and the circut court isn’t obligated to “address hypothetical scenarios in its order continuing protective placement.”
Court of Appeals Publication Orders, 2/11
court of appeals publication orders, 2/16/11
On Point posts from this list:
2011 WI App 21 State v. Basil E. Ryan, Jr.
2011 WI App 22 State v. Terry L. Kletzien, Jr.
2011 WI App 25 State v. Demetrius M. Boyd
2011 WI App 26 Heather B. v. Jennifer B.
Briefing – Nomenclature
Donna J. Murr v. St. Croix County Board of Adjustment, 2008AP2728, District 3, 2/15/11
court of appeals decision (recommended for publication); case activity
The Board’s response brief repeatedly refers to Murr as plaintiff. We remind counsel that references should be to names, not party designations. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.19(1)(i).
Surpassingly minor point? Sure –
SVP – Petition for Discharge – Request for Independent Examiner, Hearing: Alleged Change of Diagnosis
State v. Kenneth R. Parrish, 2010AP809, District 1, 2/15/11
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Parrish: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; case activity; Parrish BiC; State Resp.; Reply
SVP – Petition for Discharge – Request for Independent Examiner
Parrish’s failure to unequivocally request appointment of an independent examiner dooms his argument on appeal that the trial court “prematurely dismissed his petition for discharge (§ 980.09) without first appointing an examiner,
TPR – Condition of Return; Best Interests Analysis
State v. Abigail W., 2010AP2792, District 1, 2/10/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Abigail W.: Jeffrey W. Jensen; case activity
TPR – Condition of Return
CHIPS condition that parent “show that you can care for and supervise your child properly and that you understand [her] special needs” wasn’t an impossible condition but, rather, was narrowly tailored to meet compelling State interest in protecting child’s safety,
Counsel Sanctions: Violation of No-Cite Rule
Shirley Anderson v. Northwood School District, 2011 WI App 31; case activity
Northwood cites a circuit court decision from another case as persuasive authority, correctly noting that such a citation does not violate WIS. STAT. RULE 809.23(3), which prohibits citing unpublished appellate cases decided before July 1, 2009. However, Northwood then emphasizes we affirmed the circuit court, provides citation to the 2005 unpublished appellate court decision,