On Point blog, page 93 of 484
Court didn’t err in reopening evidence at refusal hearing
State v. Bartosz Mika, 2019AP1488, District 2, 2/19/20 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The circuit court appropriately exercised its discretion in continuing Mika’s refusal hearing so the state could call another witness, and the testimony of the additional witness established police had reasonable suspicion to stop Mika.
Attorney’s e-filing registration doesn’t eliminate need for personal service under § 801.02(1)
State ex rel. Michael J. Vieth v. John Tate II, 2018AP1525, District 4, 2/13/20 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Lawyers handling petitions for a writ of certiorari to review administrative decisions (or any other extraordinary writs, for that matter) should be aware of this decision. It holds that, under the electronic filing system statutes, the administrative agency’s attorney registering as a user does not relieve a petition of the obligation to personally serve the agency with the document initiating the proceeding.
Challenges to termination of parental rights are forfeited or meritless
Iron County DHS v. N.H.-D., 2019AP1520, District 3, 2/12/20 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
N.H.-D.’s claims that the termination of her parental rights violated various due process rights, but those claims are forfeited and undeveloped. Her claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel is meritless.
Trial counsel’s failure to disclose officer’s mental health issues before plea wasn’t prejudicial
State v. Jacqueline A. Ziriax Anderson, 2018AP2410-CR, District 3, 2/11/20 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The state offered Anderson a deal: plead to OWI 2nd and it would recommend the minimum mandatory penalties. The state made that offer because the arresting officer had resigned from the department due to some “mental health issues” and the prosecutor apparently wasn’t eager to call him as a witness. Anderson’s lawyer found this out immediately before Anderson entered her plea—but didn’t tell Anderson. She learned about it afterward. (¶¶3-4, 8-11). While trial counsel performed deficiently by failing to tell Anderson that information before she pled, that doesn’t entitle her to plea withdrawal because she fails to show she would have insisted on going to trial if trial counsel would have told her, as required by State v. Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d 303, 312, 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996).
Circuit court erred in admitting video statements of children under § 908.08
State v. Angel Mercado, 2020 WI App 14, petition for review granted, 5/19/20; reversed 1/20/20; case activity (including briefs)
The court of appeals orders a new trial for Mercado on the grounds the circuit court erred in admitting the video statements of three children who accused him of sexually assaulting them. The circuit court didn’t comply with the requirements of § 908.08(2) and (3) in admitting the videos, and the videos also weren’t admissible under the residual hearsay exception or as prior inconsistent statements.
Ban on firearm silencers is constitutional
State v. Thomas Michael Barrett, 2020 WI App 13; case activity (including briefs)
The court of appeals rejects Barrett’s facial and void-for-vagueness challenges to Wisconsin’s prohibition on firearm silencers, § 941.298.
Consent to draw blood was voluntary
State v. Justin T. Kane, 2018AP1885-CR, District 4, 2/6/20 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Kane’s consent to a blood draw after his arrest for OWI was voluntary under all the circumstances.
January 2020 publication list
On January 29, 2020, the court of appeals ordered publication in the following criminal law related cases:
State v. James L. Jackson, Jr., 2020 WI App 4 (requiring internet identifiers of sex offender registrants doesn’t violate First Amendment)
Dane County DHS v. J.R., 2020 WI App 5 (rejecting an “as applied” challenge to amended § 48.415(2)(a))
COA upholds decision to make juvenile register as sex offender
State v. D.I.G., 2019AP855, 2/5/2020, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The juvenile here was found delinquent for sexual contact with his younger sister. He moved the court for a stay of registration under State v. Cesar G., 2004 WI 61, 272 Wis. 2d 22, 682 N.W.2d 1. The court declined to stay registration, disagreeing with the expert assessment the juvenile presented. As you might expect, the court of appeals affirms this discretionary decision.
TPR defense win! COA sees material issues of fact, reverses summary judgment on abandonment
Racine County Human Services Department v. S.J.A., 2019AP2160 & 2161, 2/5/20, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
It would be interesting to see the briefs in this case, but since it’s a TPR, they’re not online. What we can see is the opinion, which shows commendable (and unfortunately uncommon) attention to detail. It’s easy to imagine a glib, slapdash affirmance of this summary judgment against the parent in a TPR; we don’t get one though. Instead we see a searching review of what was proved and what was not, and a (really all too uncommon) reversal.