On Point blog, page 45 of 217
Court to State: Ends of adult court jurisdiction don’t justify means violating juvenile code
State v. Cody Phillips, 2014 WI App 3; case activity
This case reached the court of appeals via a petition for leave to appeal a non-final order.
The State’s juvenile delinquency petition alleged that Phillips committed one count of 1st-dgree sexual assault of child by use or threat of force and a second count of 2nd-degree assault of a child. At the State’s request, the juvenile court waived Phillips into adult court on both counts and ultimately pled no contest to two counts of 2nd-degree sexual assault of a child.
Aggregating 289 thefts as 1 continuous offense then dividing by 8 = no multiplicity violation
State v. Tina M. Jacobsen, 2014 WI App 13; case activity
Jacobsen was charged with 8 offenses for stealing $500,000 from her employer, and she was convicted on 3 counts. The charges were based on 289 individual thefts occurring over 3 years. On appeal she claimed her trial lawyer was ineffective for failing advise her that, and for failing to seek dismissal because, the charges were duplicitous or multiplicitous.
Defendant must file a separate § 973.195 sentence adjustment petition for each sentence to be adjusted
State v. Jeffery Polar, Jr., 2014 WI App 15; case activity
The court of appeals holds that the plain language of § 973.195(1r)(a) requires a defendant serving multiple sentences to file a separate sentence adjustment petition for each individual sentence the defendant is seeking to adjust.
Polar’s governing sentences consisted of two consecutive terms, one with 7 years of confinement, the second for 3 years of confinement.
The newly-adopted Daubert standard does not apply to ch. 980 discharge proceedings if the original petition for commitment was filed before the effective date of the standard’s adoption
State v. Michael Alger, 2013 WI App 148, petition for review granted, 5/23/14, affirmed, 2015 WI 3; case activity
In this important decision addressing an issue that’s been percolating in ch. 980 cases, the court of appeals holds that the Daubert standard for expert testimony does not apply to any proceedings in a ch.
Person committed under ch. 980 is entitled to appointment of counsel, independent examiner before court reviews discharge petition
State v. Bradley M. Jones, 2013 WI App 151; case activity
¶1 …. Wisconsin Stat. § 980.07 (2011-12) mandates annual reexamination of persons committed to secure treatment facilities as sexually violent persons. Following the Department of Health Services’ annual reexamination, Bradley M. Jones requested and was denied appointment of an independent examiner and counsel prior to review of his petition for discharge. Under the applicable statutes,
Good faith exception to exclusionary rule saves fruits of unlawful search in Mexico
State v. Jack E. Johnson, 2013 WI App 140; case activity
As part of their investigation of Johnson’s involvement in a homicide, Wisconsin police wanted to search Johnson’s rented residence in Rosarito, Mexico. They contacted FBI Special Agent Eckel, the U.S. liaison between Mexican and American law enforcement authorities. Eckel called a liaison in Mexico and told him that United States law enforcement authorities wanted to search Johnson’s residence and needed to make sure the search was lawfully conducted so any evidence found could be used in an American court.
Erroneous admission of other acts evidence was harmless; letter written by attorney to victim at defendant’s behest was properly admitted
State v. Jeffrey A. Adamczak, 2013 WI App 150; case activity
Admission of other acts evidence
Adamczak was charged with sexual exploitation by a therapist in violation of Wis. Stat. § 940.22 for having sexual contact with Sabrina. He testified the contact occurred, but only after the patient-therapist relationship was over. (¶¶3, 5). Before trial the state moved to admit the testimony of Sarah and Gail,
Probable cause finding establishes defendant’s breach of plea agreement; State chooses remedy of partial recission
State v. Carl A. Reed, 2013 WI App 132; case activity
Reed pled no contest to substantial battery in exchange for the State’s agreement to dismiss 3 other counts and to refrain from making a sentencing recommendation. The State also received the right to withdraw from the agreement if Reed “commits any new or additional crimes.” Reed was later charged with new crimes. So, the State presented a recommendation at sentencing.
Court of appeals reverses conviction for hit and run involving death due to trial counsel’s ineffective assistance
State v. Marker Alan Sperber, 2013AP358-CR, District 3, 10/15/13 (not recommended for publication); case activity
This appeal turns on Wis JI-Criminal 2670, which explains the 5 elements of the crime the Sperber was charged with–a hit and run causing death to the victim. The 2nd element requires that the defendant know that his vehicle was involved in an accident involving a person. The problem here was that Sperber was driving in the dark on wet roads flanked by blackened snowbanks.
Court’s deviation from the exact language of immigration warning in § 971.08(1)(c) doesn’t entitle defendant to plea withdrawal
State v. Ali Mursal, 2013 WI App 125; case activity
Before accepting a defendant’s guilty or no contest plea the court is required to advise the defendant there may be immigration consequences. Wis. Stat. § 971.08(1)(c). While that statute prescribes a text for the required warning—complete with quotation marks—the court of appeals holds in this case that a judge’s failure to repeat that language verbatim is not by itself grounds for plea withdrawal.