On Point blog, page 3 of 7
OWI Enhancer: Crossing State Line, Multiple Offenses, Continuous Incident
State v. Andrew C. Holder, 2011 WI App 116 (recommended for publication); for Holder: Edward D. Burke, Jr.; case activity
Although the penalty enhancement scheme generally allows increased penalty for each prior OWI conviction, § 346.65(2)(am)5. provides that “convictions arising out of the same incident or occurrence shall be counted as one.” Nonetheless, Burke’s driving under the influence across the Michigan border,
Traffic Stop: Reasonable Suspicion, Traffic Violation; OWI Refusal Hearing: Lawfulness of Arrest
State v. Dimitrius Anagnos, 2011 WI App 118 (recommended for publication); for Anagnos: Barry S. Cohen; case activity; reversed, 2012 WI 64
Traffic Stop – No Turn Signal
Failure to use a turn signal where neither traffic nor pedestrians are present doesn’t support a traffic stop:
¶9 Wisconsin Stat. § 346.34(1)(b) states that a driver must use a turn signal “[i]n the event that any other traffic may be affected.” The circuit court found that Anagnos did not violate this statute when he made a left turn without using his signal,
SVP: Discharge Petition
State v. Charles M. Ermers, Jr., 2011 WI App 113 (recommended for publication); for Ermers: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
A ch. 980 discharge hearing requires that the petitioner allege “facts from which the court or jury may conclude the person’s condition has changed since the date of his or her initial commitment order so that the person does not meet the criteria for commitment as a sexually violent person,”
Petition for (NGI) Conditional Release, § 971.17(2) (1987-88): Dangerousness, Review
State v. Alan Adin Randall, 2011 WI App 102 (recommended for publication); for Randall: Brian Kinstler, Craig S. Powell; case activity; prior history: State v. Randall, 192 Wis. 2d 800, 532 N.W.2d 94 (1995) (“Randall I”); State v. Randall, 222 Wis. 2d 53, 586 N.W.2d 318 (Ct.
Statute of Limitations: Attempted first-Degree Intentional Homicide
State v. Rodney A. Larson, 2011 WI App 106 (recommended for publication); for Larson: Chris Gramstrup; case activity
Prosecution for attempt rather than completed crime, §939.32, comes within the general limitation period in § 939.74(1). Therefore, although prosecution for homicide may be commenced at any time, § 939.74(2)(a), Larson’s prosecution for attempted first-degree intentional homicide had to be commenced within 6 years, and must be dismissed as untimely.
Parole: Mootness Doctrine, rel. to Deferment – Review of Deferment, Risk-Determination
Harlan Richards v. Graham, 2011 WI App 100(recommended for publication); for Richards: Kendall W. Harrison, Jennifer L. Gregor; case activity
Mootness Doctrine
Challenge to Parole Commission decision to increase deferment period from 10 to 12 months, and to Program Review Committee decision to increase security status, not rendered moot by subsequent parole and program hearings.
¶11 An issue is moot when a party seeks a determination that will have no practical effect on an existing legal controversy.
Search & Seizure: Consent to Search: Co-Occupant – Warrantless Entry: Probable Cause & Exigent Circumstances
State v. Deundra R. Lathan, 2011 WI App 104 (recommended for publication); for Lathan: George S. Tauscheck; case activity
Consent to Search, Co-Occupant
Consent to search premises given by one occupant overrides refusal to consent by co-occupant when neither is the subject of the search or ensuing arrest (resolving question expressly held open by Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103, 120 n.
Sex Offender Registration: Out-of-State Convictions – “Misdemeanor Treatment,” § 301.45(6)(a)2
State v. Yancy D. Freland, 2011 WI App 80 (recommended for publication); for Freland: Michael D. Zell; case activity
Conviction for an out-of-state sex offense comparable to a misdemeanor in Wisconsin will be treated as a misdemeanor for sex offender registration purposes, § 301.45(6).
¶12 Wisconsin Stat. § 301.45(1d)(am)1. specifically defines has been “[f]ound to have committed a sex offense by another jurisdiction” to include a person who has been convicted “for a violation of a law of another state that is comparable to a sex offense.”[7] Taken as a whole,
Statutes: Retroactive Application
Rock Tenn Company v. Labor and Industry Review Commission, 2011 WI App 93 (recommended for publication); case activity
A worker’s compensation provision authorizing payment “for any future treatment” enacted after a work-related injury was incurred is remedial in nature and therefore can “be retroactively applied to award prospective treatment expenses.”
¶13 We reject Rock Tenn’s argument and conclude that LIRC reasonably held that Wis.
Reasonable Suspicion, Terry Stop: High-Crime Area, Ski Mask, et al.; Appellate Procedure: State’s Waiver of Argument
State v. Deshon C. Matthews, 2011 WI App 92 (recommended for publication); for Matthews: Paul G. Bonneson; case activity
Terry Stop – Reasonable Suspicion
Reasonable suspicion supported stop of Matthews, when police on patrol saw him wearing a ski mask and hoodie late at night in a high-crime area near a woman who was walking away form him and who appeared to be frightened.