On Point blog, page 102 of 265
No hearing on ineffective assistance claim for failure to investigate misconduct claims against sheriff
State v. Alice M. Fischer, 2018AP422-CR, 9/18/18, District 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This case may sound vaguely familiar. Trial counsel failed to investigate and make use of a claim against a sheriff’s sergeant, Matthew Paradise, the defendant in a civil rights action alleging that he and others conspired to create inaccurate reports leading to a false drunk driving charge against one Tanya Weyker. Turns out Paradise also stopped Fischer for OWI and testified at her trial.
Denial of plea withdrawal, sentence modification and postconviction discovery affirmed
State v. Darrick L. Bennett, 2016AP2209-CR, 9/18/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Bennett was charged with 1st degree intentional homicide, but pled guilty to 1st degree reckless homicide. In a decision turning on facts specific to this case, the court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision denying (a) plea withdrawal without a hearing, (b) sentence modification based on a new factors, and (c) postconviction discovery of evidence that might have affected his sentence.
Court of appeals sees no ineffective assistance in not challenging phone-tracking warrant
State v. Brinkley L. Bridges, 2017AP2311-CR, 9/25/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Bridges pled to five felonies involving guns and drugs; the evidence against him was derived, in part, from a warrant police had obtained allowing them to track his cell phone. He argues counsel was ineffective for not challenging that warrant because the application didn’t show probable cause.
No error in finding defendant guilty of OWI
Village of Pleasant Prairie v. Brian Lucas, 2017AP2131, District 2, 8/22/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
This pro se defendant’s challenges to his OWI conviction go nowhere.
No error in handling testimony regarding non-appearing parent in TPR trial
Monroe County DHS v. J.N.D., 2018AP177, District 4, 8/23/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The court of appeals rejects J.N.D.’s argument that her TPR trial should be redone because the real controversy wasn’t fully tried.
No error in failing to strike allegedly biased juror at TPR trial
Sheboygan County DHHS v. K.N.L., 2017AP2413, District 2, 8/22/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
K.N.L. asserts a prospective juror (“Juror J.”) was biased and so the circuit court erred in declining to strike her for cause. Applying Wisconsin’s case law governing jury bias (summarized at ¶¶13-16), the court of appeals affirms the circuit court’s conclusion the juror wasn’t biased and, even if she was, the failure to strike her was harmless as she didn’t end up on the jury because K.N.L. peremptorily struck her.
GAL’s closing argument at TPR trial wasn’t prejudicial
State v. T.W., 2018AP967 & 2018AP968, District 1, 8/21/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
At the trial on the petition to terminate T.W.’s parental rights, the GAL argued in closing that the jury should consider the interests of the children. T.W.’s lawyer didn’t object, but the court of appeals holds that failure wasn’t prejudicial and so rejects T.W.’s claim that trial counsel was ineffective.
Circuit court’s expert testimony rulings upheld
State v. Natalie N. Murphy, 2017AP1559-CR, 8/16/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
To no avail, Murphy challenges the circuit court’s decision to exclude her expert’s testimony and its decision to allow certain testimony from the state’s expert.
No error in denying request to delay trial
State v. Ronnie Cecil Peebles, 2017AP2536-CR, District 4, 8/16/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The circuit court didn’t err in denying the adjournment request Peebles made on the morning of trial because he said he was feeling ill.
On the unhappy snares and traps awaiting unwary, unschooled, and unprosperous appellants
Lafayette County v. Ian D. Humphrey, 2016AP966, District 4, 8/16/18 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including respondent’s brief)
Humphrey wants appellate review of the forfeiture judgment entered against him for operating a vehicle while suspended. He doesn’t get it.