On Point blog, page 332 of 485
Prosecutorial Failure to Disclose Evidence; Deficient Performance – Failure to Suppress Showup
State v. Melvin G. Walton, No. 2009AP001304-CR, District I, 6/22/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Walton: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Prosecutorial Failure to Disclose Evidence
¶28 The State has two separate evidence-disclosure responsibilities: a statutory responsibility imposed by WIS. STAT. § 971.23 and a constitutional responsibility imposed by Brady v. Maryland,
Traffic Stop – OWI – Reasonable Suspicion
City of Ripon v. Jonathan Lebese, No. 2009AP2996-FT, District II, 6/16/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Lebese: Wendy A. Patrickus; BiC; Resp.
¶13 The circuit court’s “preliminary ruling” was based on the well-established standards of reasonable suspicion. Lebese’s counsel had proffered that the additional defense witness would corroborate Lebese’s account that he swerved in an evasive maneuver to avoid colliding with the car to his right.
Milw. Dep’y. Sh. Assoc. and Kuhtz v. City of Wauwatosa, No. 2009AP1924, District I, 6/15/10
court of appeals decision; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Confidentiality – § 51.30(4) – Emergency Detention Statement
Release by a police department of a statement of emergency detention, occasioned by a deputy sheriff’s threat to kill superior officers, violated the § 51.30(4) prohibition on release of “treatment records”; and was not justified by the public policy exception that imposes on psychiatrists the duty to warn potential targets of threats made by patients.
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion, OWI
Shawano Co. v. William P. Pari, No. 2009AP2338-FT, District III, 6/15/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Pari: John S. Bartholomew; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶10 We agree that Pari’s minimal deviations within the traffic lane do not alone give rise to reasonable suspicion that he was operating while intoxicated. See id., ¶¶18-21. Nor do we place great emphasis on that fact here when considering the totality of the circumstances.
Appellate Review – Implicit Findings; Statement – Voluntariness
State v. Armando J. Castanada, No. 2009AP1438-CR, District I, 6/15/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Castanada: Jeremy C. Perri; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Appellate Review – Implicit Findings
¶30 The postconviction circuit court did not make any express findings as to the credibility of any of the witnesses’ testimony. However, as the State observes, when the circuit court does not make express findings,
Probable Cause – OWI
Bradley K. Darwin, No. 2009AP2608-FT, District IV, 6/10/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Darwin: Bill Ginsberg; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶5 Darwin argues that the officer lacked probable cause to arrest him for OWI. The municipal court made the following findings of fact with respect to probable cause: Darwin signaled a turn, but failed to complete it; he denied drinking;
Expungement – Ordinance Violation
State v. Melody P.M., No. 2009AP2994, District IV, 6/10/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication)
Civil conviction for an ordinance violation may be expunged under § 973.015.
Can’t provide any of the background beyond what’s recited in the opinion, because all traces have been removed from both circuit court and appellate dockets. Makes sense: if you’re going to order expungement then the order ought to have practical meaning.
State v. Brian A. Oetzman, 2009AP2514-CR, District II, 6/9/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Oetzman: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traffic Stop – U-Turn
¶8 As such, three rules of the road come into play.Under Wis. Stat. § 346.34(1), no person may turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in Wis.
State v. John H. Townsend, 2008AP2031, District I, 6/8/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); pro se; Resp. Br.
Assistance of Counsel – Plea-Withdrawal
Counsel’s failure to file pre-sentencing motion to withdraw plea wasn’t due to failure to investigate claimed newly discovered evidence, hence wasn’t ineffective: according to trial court findings of fact, counsel indeed considered the value of this evidence and moreover allowed Townsend himself to decide whether to file the motion,
County of Milwaukee v. Caleb L. Manske, 2009AP1779, District I, 6/8/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Manske: Jennifer R. Drow; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traffic Stop – Reasonable Suspicion
¶16 Manske submits that because his driving was in some respects not consistent with an impaired driver, Galipo did not have reasonable suspicion to stop him. However, the test for reasonable suspicion is not whether all of the driver’s actions constituted erratic driving.