On Point blog, page 2 of 271

COA affirms suppression order because officer’s mistake of law did not provide reasonable suspicion for traffic stop.

State v. Michael P. Bundy, 2025AP1072, 6/25/26, District IV (not eligible for publication); case activity

The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order suppressing the fruits of a traffic stop because an officer’s mistake of law regarding the driver’s suspected violation of the window tinting regulation did not provide reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle.

Read full article >

Defense win: COA reverses summary judgment on continuing denial of visitation ground and orders summary judgment for parents on same ground

Waupaca County Department of Health & Human Services v. J.L.C. and M.M.C., 2026AP498 and 647, 6/25/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

JLC and MMC each appeal the circuit court order terminating their parental rights to their child, CMC, arguing that the court erred in granting Waupaca County’s motion for summary judgment on grounds. COA concludes that the ground on which SJ was granted, continuing denial of visitation, requires the county to prove that the parents received adequate notice of the conditions of resuming visitation, and the county cannot make this showing under the facts. Therefore, COA reverses the order and remands with directions that the circuit court grant partial summary judgment to both parents on the continuing denial of visitation ground. 

Read full article >

Defense win: COA reverses order continuing protective placement

La Crosse County v. P.A.E., 2025AP303, 6/18/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

COA reverses the circuit court’s order continuing PAE’s protective placement on the basis that La Crosse County failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that PAE was so totally incapable of providing for her own care or custody as to create a substantial risk of serious harm to herself or others.

Read full article >

COA rejects ineffectiveness arguments in TPR and affirms

Green County v. K.M.S., 2025AP199, 6/18/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

Applying an exceptionally deferential review to K.M.S.’s ineffectiveness claims, COA affirms in the face of a somewhat confusing appellate record.

Read full article >

Defense win: COA affirms order suppressing blood test evidence due to coercion

City of Antigo v. John Paul Fermanich, 2023AP1834, 6/16/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity

The City of Antigo appeals an order granting John Paul Fermanich’s motion to suppress blood evidence because Fermanich’s consent to the blood draw was coerced. COA affirms in this “close case” as it is the city’s burden to demonstrate that Fermanich freely and voluntarily consented to the warrantless blood draw.

Read full article >

COA affirms traffic judgment over pro se sufficiency challenges

County of Milwaukee v. Kent Austin Williams, 2025AP2110, 6/16/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity

Kent Austin Williams, pro se, challenges the circuit court’s judgment finding him guilty of speeding on the basis that Milwaukee County did not present sufficient evidence to support the violation. COA disagrees and affirms.

Read full article >

COA affirms juvenile adjudication, finds that juvenile’s writings were “true threats”

State  v. I.T.S., 2025AP2517, 6/17/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

Although I.T.S. argues that his writings composed during an in-school suspension were private and not true threats for the purposes of the First Amendment, COA affirms.

Read full article >

COA: Felony fleeing and resisting arrest are the “same act” for purposes of tolling statute of limitations.

State v. Aman D. Singh, 2025AP424, 6/16/26, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity

The COA held that felony fleeing and resisting arrest are the “same act” for purposes of tolling the statute of limitations.

Read full article >

Defense win: COA reverses TPR dispositional order

Waupaca County Department of Health & Human Services v. C.J.T., 2026AP794, 6/11/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

CJT appeals the circuit court order terminating his parental rights to his son, JJT, arguing that the court failed to demonstrate that it considered all of the required factors at disposition. Despite the deferential standard of review to a TPR dispositional order, COA agrees, reversing the termination order and remanding for a proper exercise of discretion.

Read full article >

COA: To continue protective placement, county does not need to show prior instances of specific harm to prove substantial risk of future harm.

Ozaukee County v. J.J.W., 2025AP1702, 6/3/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order continuing “Jacob’s” protective placement and determined the County did not need to establish a substantial risk of future harm by presenting evidence of previous harm identical to the harm that is anticipated.

Read full article >