On Point blog, page 179 of 214
Ex Post Facto – Continuing Offense
State v. Alfredo Ramirez, 2001 WI App 158, PFR filed 7/11/01
For Ramirez: Elizabeth A. Cavendish-Sosinski
Issue: Whether § 943.201(2) creates a continuing offense such that, as applied to Ramirez, it violated the ex post facto clause because the statute was promulgated after he commenced the activity that formed the basis for the charge.
Holding:
¶18. We hold that Ramirez obtained money in the form of wages,
First Amendment – Overbreadth – Injunction – Prostitution-Related Activity
City of Milwaukee v. Tanya M. Bean, et al., 2001 WI App 258, PFR filed 11/8/01
For Bean: Jerome F. Buting, Pamela S. Moorshead
Issue1: Whether prostitution activities in the area encompassed by the injunction were shown sufficiently to constitute a nuisance.
Holding:
¶13. Although it is true, as the appellants argue, that the infusion of prostitution in the affected areas can, on one level at least,
Equal Protection – Sex Offender Registration – Juvenile – False Imprisonment
State v. Joseph E.G., 2001 WI App 29, 240 Wis. 2d 481, 623 N.W.2d 137
For Joseph E.G.: Susan E. Alesia, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether § 301.45(1m) (1997-98) violates equal protection and substantive due process in failing to excuse juveniles convicted of false imprisonment from sex offender registration.
Holding:
¶12 In contrast to the facts that could relieve an offender from registration for those crimes enumerated in WIS.
Expectation of Privacy – Stairway, Multiple Unit Building
State v. Matthew J. Trecroci, Ryan J. Frayer, Ronnie J. Frayer, Scott E. Oberst, Amy L. Wicks, 2001 WI App 126
For defendants: Robert R. Henak
Issue: Whether warrantless police entry of a stairway in a multiple unit building was lawful.
Holding: Existence of reasonable expectation of privacy in a stairway leading to the upper levels of a dwelling is decided case-by-case, rather than under bright-line rule.
Reasonable Suspicion – Frisk – Placing Person in Police Squad
State v. Robert F. Hart, 2001 WI App 283
For Hart: John Deitrich
Issue: Whether the need to transport in a police vehicle a person, who is not in custody, is itself an exigency justifying a pat-down search for weapons.
Holding:
¶17. … With five members of the court declining to adopt a per ser rule, the law in Wisconsin is that the need to transport a person in a police vehicle is not,
Suppression Hearing – Riverside Hearing – Factual Misrepresentation
State v. Eddie McAttee, 2001 WI App 262
For McAttee: Russell D. Bohach
Issue: Whether the Riverside probable cause finding was tainted by a factual misrepresentation (specifically, that McAttee had been implicated by a “coconspirator”) in the police report submitted in support of continued detention.
Holding: Though describing the informant as a coconspirator “may have been legally inexact, it also may have accurately conveyed the police’s understanding,
Challenge Incarceration Program (“Boot Camp”) – §§ 973.01(3m), 302.045
State v. Ashley B. Steele, 2001 WI App 160, PFR filed 6/25/01
For Steele: Christopher William Rose
Issue: Whether sentencing eligibility for “boot camp” is determined by bright-line statutory guidelines, or by exercise of trial court discretion.
Holding:
¶12. While an offender must meet the eligibility requirements of Wis. Stat. § 302.045(2) to participate in the challenge incarceration program, pursuant to Wis.
Warrants – Good-Faith Exception – Remand for Determination
State v. Bill Paul Marquardt, 2001 WI App 219, PFR filed 9/20/01
For Marquardt: James B. Connell
Issue: Whether evidence seized under a warrant defective because unsupported by probable cause may be admissible under the good-faith doctrine.
Holding: Given that, subsequent to trial-level litigation, the supreme court recognized the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule, in State v. Eason, 2001 WI 98,
Warrants – Probable Cause
State v. Bill Paul Marquardt, 2001 WI App 219, PFR filed 9/20/01
For Marquardt: James B. Connell
Issue: Whether the search warrant was supported by probable cause.
Holding:
¶18. …. The State points to several facts in the affidavits: (1) Mary’s telephone was off the hook the day she was killed, suggesting “that the perpetrator had been inside the residence”; (2) Mary was shot and stabbed,
Warrants – Failure to Make Contemporaneous Record of Telephonic Application – Reconstruction of Application
State v. Cherise A. Raflick, 2001 WI 129
For Raflik: Michael J. Fitzgerald, Dean A. Strang
Issue/Holding:
¶1. This case requires us to decide whether suppression is the proper remedy when a telephonic application for a search warrant is not recorded in accordance with Wis. Stat. § 968.12(3)(d)1, and when the factual basis for the warrant is reconstructed in an ex parte hearing after the warrant has been executed.