On Point blog, page 185 of 215
Plea Bargains — Breach: Materiality — Promise Must Induce Plea
State v. Anthony A. Parker, 2001 WI App 111
Issue: Whether transfer to an out-of-state prison breached the plea bargain.
Holding:
¶7 … (I)n order to prevail on a claim of breach of a plea agreement, Parker cannot rely on whatever his ‘reasonable expectations’ might have been at sentencing. Instead, he must show the violation of a specific prosecutorial promise that induced his plea. See State v.
Plea Bargains — Breach: Limiting Defense Presentation at Sentencing
State v. Shomari L. Robinson, 2001 WI App 127, PFR filed 5/7/01
For Robinson: Joseph L. Sommers
Issue: Whether the plea bargain was breached when the defendant wasn’t allowed to present certain evidence at sentencing.
Holding:
¶16 … (T)he trial court did not clearly err in finding that the plea agreement called for argument by the parties, and at most, a very limited presentation of evidence at sentencing regarding the nature of the sexual assault.
Particular Examples of Misconduct, § 904.04(2) — Prior Child Abuse — Trial on Homicide of Child
State v. Garren G. Gribble, 2001 WI App 227, PFR filed
For Gribble: Charles B. Vetzner, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether evidence of prior child abuse, both to the immediate victim and another child, was properly admitted in a trial on homicide of a child.
Holding: There was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant committed the various prior acts.
Particular Examples of Misconduct, § 904.04(2) — Admissibility — in General
State v. Joseph F. Rizzo, 2001 WI App 57, 241 Wis. 2d 241, 624 N.W.2d 824, reversed and remanded on other grounds, 2002 WI 20
For Rizzo: Franklyn M. Gimbel
Issue: Whether admission of other acts evidence was an erroneous exercise of discretion.
Holding:
¶5 … In a written decision, the trial court properly applied the Sullivan three-step analysis:
The acts which took place some years ago are remarkably similar to the allegations before the Court in this case …
Particular Examples of Misconduct, § 904.04(2) — Prior Sexual Assault of Adult — Relevance to Charge of Child Sexual Assault — Dissimilarities, Including Age Disparity of Victims
State v. Kevin S. Meehan, 2001 WI App 119
For Meehan: Pamela Moorshead, Buting & Williams
Issue: Whether a prior sexual assault of an adult was sufficiently similar to the charged sexual assault of a child to be admissible as other crimes evidence.
Holding:
¶14. The next step is whether the 1992 conviction was relevant; that is, whether under Wis. Stat. § 904.01, it relates to a fact or proposition that is of consequence to the determination of the action and if it has probative value.
“Shiffra” Material — In Camera Inspection
State v. Terrance W. Walther, 2001 WI App 23, 240 Wis. 2d 619, 623 N.W.2d 205
For Walther: Raymond M. Dall’Osto, Kathryn A. Keppel
Issue: Whether the defendant’s motion for in camera inspection of the child sexual assault complainant’s confidential records should have been granted.
Holding:
¶11 Here, Walther established more than the mere possibility that the requested records ‘may be necessary to a fair determination of guilt or innocence.’
§ 943.10, Burglary (Entry with Intent to Commit Felony) – Elements
State v. Earl Steele III, 2001 WI App 34, 241 Wis. 2d 269, 625 N.W.2d 595
For Steele: Timothy J. Gaskell
Issue: Whether felon in possession of firearm may be the underlying felony to burglary (entry with intent to commit felony), § 943.10(1)(a), when the defendant-felon was already in possession of the firearm before entry.
Holding: “(A) person commits a burglary when he or she unlawfully enters the premises with the intent to commit a felony while on the premises,
Guilty Pleas – Required Knowledge — Elements — Burglary with Intent to Commit Felony — Specific Felony
State v. Earl Steele, 2001 WI App 34, 241 Wis. 2d 269, 625 N.W.2d 595
For Steele: Timothy J. Gaskell
Issue: Whether the colloquy on a guilty plea to burglary/intent-to-commit-felony must apprise the defendant of the specific felony.
Holding:
¶8 The trial court chose to summarize WIS. STAT. § 943.10 during colloquy, in combination with questioning defense counsel. Steele contends that this summary was inadequate,
Witness – False Testimony
State v. Larry J. Sprosty, 2001 WI App 231, PFR filed
For Sprosty: Jack E. Schairer, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue:: Whether an expert witness’s testimony should have been struck retrospectively when it became known, after the proceeding had concluded, that he had lied about his credentials and background.
Holding:
¶33. We cannot conclude that the circuit court’s refusal to strike Thomalla’s testimony was improper.
Guilty Pleas – Required Knowledge — Collateral & Direct Consequences — Out-of-State Prison Transfer
State v. Anthony A. Parker, 2001 WI App 111
Issue: Whether transfer to an out-of-state prison is a collateral consequence of a guilty plea.
Holding:
¶8. In addition, we agree with the State that transfer to an out-of-state prison is a collateral consequence of Parker’s plea of no contest….
¶9. We have held that collateral consequences include deportation, restitution, subsequent filing of a sexually violent person petition,