On Point blog, page 14 of 17
Particular Examples of Misconduct, § 904.04(2) – Bias of Prosecution Witness
State v. Walter T. Missouri, 2006 WI App 74
For Missouri: Jeffrey W. Jensen
Issue: Whether evidence of police officer Mucha’s mistreatment of a 3rd-party (Scull) in an otherwise unrelated but similar instance was admissible to further defendant Missouri’s claim that Mucha was untruthful in denying physical abuse against and planting evidence on Missouri.
Holding: This evidence satisfied the three-part test of State v.
Particular Examples of Misconduct, § 904.04(2) – “Reverse” Misconduct – Misidentification of Defendant on Similar Crime
State v. Bruce T. Davis, 2006 WI App 23
For Davis: Russell Bohach
Issue/Holding: Evidence that Davis was misidentified as the perpetrator of a crime he could not have committed but which was similar to the crimes he was tried for was admissible:
¶28 Looking at the first factor, the State concedes that this witness’s testimony was offered for identification purposes, an admissible purpose under Wis.
§ 904.04 – Greater Latitude Rule in Sexual Assaults, Generally
State v. Randy Mcgowan, 2006 WI App 80
For Mcgowan: Dianne M. Erickson
Issue/Holding:
¶14 … The supreme court has provided significant guidance concerning the use of other acts evidence in child sexual assault cases. In State v. Davidson, 2000 WI 91, 236 Wis. 2d 537, 613 N.W.2d 606, the court discussed the three-step framework, which was originally set forth in State v.
§ 904.04 – Greater Latitude Rule in Sexual Assaults — Admissibility of Assault by One Child on Another Child 8 Years Before Charged Offense
State v. Randy Mcgowan, 2006 WI App 80
For Mcgowan: Dianne M. Erickson
Issue/Holding:
¶20 We cannot conclude that the allegations are sufficiently factually similar to justify admission of Janis’s testimony as other acts evidence. Assuming the truthfulness of both Sasha and Janis for purposes of this analysis, we conclude that a single assault, by one young child on another young child, eight years before repeated assaults by an adult on a different child who was three years older than the first victim,
Guilty Pleas – Required Knowledge — Deportation — Detainer Filed in Another Case
State v. Javier Bedolla, 2006 WI App 154, (AG’s) PFR filed 7/26/06
For Bedolla: Susan E. Alesia
Issue: Whether the defendant failed to show likelihood of deportation, so as to entitle him to plea withdrawal under § 971.08(1)(c), where a detainer had already been filed against him in another case which would also subject him to deportation.
Holding:
¶10 What is relevant is that Bedolla,
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Use of Complaint, Generally
State v. Wayne A. Sutton, 2006 WI App 118, PFR filed 6/18/06
For Sutton: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶16 Sutton next argues that the circuit court erred in accepting his plea on the charge of first-degree recklessly endangering safety because there was not a sufficient factual basis for that charge. When we review a circuit court’s determination that a sufficient factual basis exists to support a plea,
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Particular Instances: Obstructing (“Lawful Authority” of Police Officer)
State v. Anna Annina, 2006 WI App 202
For Annina: Robert R. Henak
Issue/Holding: Although police entry into the defendant’s house was pursuant to a search warrant later declared to be invalid, the defendant’s acts in response to that entry amounted to disorderly conduct which did allow for an arrest under lawful police authority; defendant could therefore be convicted for resisting a lawful arrest for disorderly conduct,
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Generally
State v. Steven A. Harvey, 2006 WI App 26
For Harvey: Christopher William Rose
Issue/Holding:
¶10 … Before accepting a guilty plea the trial court must make such inquiry as satisfies it that the defendant in fact committed the crime charged. Wis. Stat. § 971.08(1)(b). The remedy for failure to establish a factual basis is plea withdrawal. State v. Harrington, 181 Wis.
Binding Authority – Dicta
State v. Steven A. Harvey, 2006 WI App 26
For Harvey: Christopher William Rose
Issue/Holding:
¶18 However, our rejection of the Committee’s definition of cunnilingus does not fully resolve this issue since, as we have observed, this definition met with at least tacit approval by the Childs court. However, we are not bound by theChilds case because it was not a cunnilingus case ….¶19 The court of appeals’ reference to cunnilingus in Childs occurred only because that term and its definition were part of the larger instruction that also addressed fellatio,
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Particular Examples: Reckless Endangering — Competing Inferences
State v. Wayne A. Sutton, 2006 WI App 118, PFR filed 6/18/06
For Sutton: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether the guilty plea to first-degree reckless endangering, amended from battery, was supported by a factual basis.
Holding:
¶21 At the plea hearing, the State presented the basis for the amended charge of first-degree reckless endangerment, relying in part on statements Sutton made to a West Bend police officer.