On Point blog, page 464 of 489
Presentation & Preservation of Argument – Footnotes
State v. Miguel Angel Santana-Lopez, 2000 WI App 122, 237 Wis.2d 332, 613 N.W.2d 918
For Santana-Lopez: Rex Anderegg
Issue/Holding: “We do not consider an argument mentioned only in a footnote to be adequately raised or preserved for appellate review,” ¶6 n.4.
Interesting that the holding itself happens to be contained in a footnote.
Restitution — Causation — “Natural and Probable Consequence” of Crime — Damage Caused by Police While Defendant Resisted Arrest
State v. Freeman Canady, 2000 WI App 87, 234 Wis. 2d 261, 610 N.W.2d 147
For Canady: Charles B. Vetzner, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether a defendant, convicted of resisting arrest, can be ordered to pay restitution for damage caused by a police officer in the course of subduing him.
Holding: Because the damage was a natural consequence of the defendant’s resisting, the defendant was a substantial factor in causing that damage and can be required to make restitution for it.
Review — Sentence After Revocation — Imposed by same Judge
State v. Brian C. Wegner, 2000 WI App 231, 239 Wis.2d 96, 619 N.W.2d 289
For Wegner: Scott A. Szabrowicz
Issue: Whether the sentencing court erroneously exercised discretion, in sentencing after revocation, by failing to consider primary sentencing factors.
Holding:
¶9 We conclude that when the same judge presides at the sentencing after revocation and the original sentencing, the judge does not have to restate the reasons supporting the original sentencing;
NGI Plea Precluded by Late Timing
State v. James H. Oswald, 2000 WI App 3, 232 Wis.2d 103, 606 N.W.2d 238
For Oswald: James L. Fullin, Jr., SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether the trial court improperly precluded Oswald from raising an NGI plea.
Holding:
¶ 49. The decision whether to grant a defendant’s motion to change his or her plea from “not guilty” to “not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect”
SVP: Discovery Violation — Waiver
State v. Eric Pletz, 2000 WI App 221, 239 Wis.2d 49, 619 N.W.2d 97
For Pletz: Michael J. Backes
Issue: Whether the state’s pretrial failure to disclose that its witness used the RRASOR screening instrument to evaluate Pletz violated his discovery rights.
Holding: Pletz waived any discovery objection by not promptly objecting, given that he was provided this information before the witness testified. ¶26. Moreover,
SVP Commitments: Post-Disposition – Discipline: Living Unit Reassignment
Edwin C. West v. Macht, 2000 WI App 134, 237 Wis. 2d 265, 614 N.W.2d 34
Issue: Whether living unit reassignment of a Ch. 980 subject was made in retaliation for his exercise of his constitutional right to petition on grievances.
Holding: A commitment subject has a protected interest against being punished for exercising first amendment rights, ¶15; however, those rights may be validly restricted if “reasonably related to legitimate therapeutic and institutional interests.”
Sentence Modification — New Factor: Community Support
State v. Thomas W. Koeppen, 2000 WI App 121, 237 Wis.2d 418, 614 N.W.2d 530
For Koeppen: Richard L. Zaffiro
Issue/Holding: Level of community support” enjoyed by the defendant not a new factor justifying sentence reduction.
SVP – Trial: Evidence – Hearsay: Letters from DSM-IV Committee
State v. Eric Pletz, 2000 WI App 221, 239 Wis.2d 49, 619 N.W.2d 97
For Pletz: Michael J. Backes
Issue: Whether letters from DSM-IV committee members, regarding the impact of an assault on a diagnosis of pedophilia, were properly admitted.
Holding: A basis for an expert opinion, otherwise hearsay, is admissible if of “a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field…. The letters relied on here,
SVP – Repealed Statute as Predicate Offense
State v. Frederick L. Pharm, 2000 WI App 167, 238 Wis. 2d 97, 617 N.W.2d 163
For Pharm: Jack E. Schairer
Issue: Whether conviction under the since-repealed statute of indecent behavior with a child may serve as a predicate offense for a Ch. 980 commitment.
Holding: “(T)he legislature clearly intended to include, within the definition of ‘sexually violent offense,’ the conduct prohibited under a previous version of a statute enumerated in Wis.
Sentencing – Review – Inaccurate Information – Prosecutorial Allocution
State v. Dione Wendell Haywood, 2009 WI App 178
For Haywood: Robert E. Haney
Issue/Holding: Asserted prosecutorial misconduct, in the form of misleading statements during allocution, is tested under State v. Wolff, 171 Wis. 2d 161, 167, 491 N.W.2d 498, 501 (Ct. App. 1992) (whether “what the prosecutor does has ‘so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process’”),