On Point blog, page 236 of 266
Expert Testimony; Impeachment – Prior Convictions
State v. Olu A. Rhodes, 2009AP25-CR, District 1, 11/22/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication), on remand from, 2011 WI 73; for Rhodes: John J. Grau; case activity
Expert witness qualification rests in the sound discretion of the trial court; here, it was well within that discretion to allow the following testimony:
¶4 Marchant, who described herself as a “criminal intelligence analyst” working for the Department of Justice,
Sentencing – Inaccurate Information – Reliance Factor
State v. Lavalle Rimmer, 2010AP2680-CR, District 1, 11/22/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Rimmer: Christian C. Starner; case activity
The sentencing court did not actually rely on concededly inaccurate information, therefore Rimmer isn’t entitled to resentencing.
Methodology for analyzing inaccurate-information issue recited, ¶¶11-16. Court suggests that something akin to explicit reference to inaccurate information required, ¶16.)
Discovery Violation, § 971.23(1)(g) – Prejudice
State v. Joseph Hammer, 2010AP3019-CR, District 1, 11/22/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Hammer: Rex Anderegg; case activity
The State’s conceded discovery violation (failure to produce reports or photographs related to a trajectory rod investigation) prejudiced the defense and therefore entitles Hammer to a new trial on two counts of attempted first-degree intentional homicide: 1. the erroneously admitted trajectory rod evidence “severely undermined”
TPR – Admission
Racine County HSD v. Bobby G. H., 2011AP795, District 2, 11/16/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Bobby G.H.: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Bobby’s phase-1 admission to termination of parental rights on the ground of failure to assume responsibility didn’t require that the trial court hear testimony before accepting the admission.
TPR – Constitutionality of § 48.415(6); Interest of Justice Review – Jury Instructions, Failure to Assume Parental Responsibility
Langlade County Dept. of Social Services v. Rebecca D., 2010AP2497, District 3, 11/15/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Rebecca D.: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
¶19 On the facts adduced at trial, Rebecca clearly failed to assume parental responsibility for Anthony, pursuant to the standards set forth in Wis. Stat. § 48.415(6). Anthony was nearly five months old when he was removed from Rebecca’s home.
PBT Admissibility – OWI, Sufficiency of Evidence
City of Mequon v. Michael R. Wilt, 2011AP931, District 2, 11/9/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wilt: Walter Arthur Piel, Jr.; case activity
Because the trial court in this bench trial did not rely on the breath test result in finding Wilt guilty of OWI, therefore his argument that the PBT result was inadmissible need not be reached, ¶¶16-17. As to whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction absent the test result:
¶23 Proof of impairment was sufficient and established by clear,
Sentencing Review – Presumptive Minimum, § 939.617(2)
State v. Alok Kumar, 2010AP2703-CR, District 1, 11/8/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Kumar: Robin Shellow, Michael E. O’Rourke; case activity
Sentence to presumptive minimum (5 years confinement) for using a computer to facilitate a child sex crime, § 948.075(lr), is upheld as a proper exercise of discretion, against Kumar’s arguments that the sentencing court: didn’t permit him to show sentences imposed by other circuit courts in presumptive-minimum cases;
Refusal to Submit to Chemical Blood Test
State v. Michael D. Urben, 2011AP982, District 1, 11/8/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Urben: Andrew Mishlove, Lauren Stuckert; case activity
Notwithstanding evidence that Urben suffered seizures before and after an automobile accident, his refusal to take BAC test wasn’t because of physical disability or disease unrelated to use of alcohol, controlled substances, etc., § 343.305(9)(a)5.c.
¶12 Under Wis.
Warrantless Arrest – Curtilage – Porch
State v. Gary F. Wieczorek, 2011AP1184-CR, District 3, 11/8/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wieczorek: James R. Koby; case activity
Warrantless arrest of Wieczorek on his front porch for OWI, after he answered the officer’s knock was constitutional. The record doesn’t show that Wieczorek had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the porch. ¶¶10-11, distinguishing State v. Walker,
Community Caretaker
City of Sheboygan v. Benjamin B. Schultz, 2011AP904, District 2, 11/09/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Schultz: Casey J. Hoff; case activity
Stop of Schultz’s vehicle supported by community caretaker doctrine where, as Schultz drove past officer conducting an otherwise unrelated traffic stop, Schultz’s passenger door opened up and someone inside of Schultz’s vehicle yelled out.
¶7 While the community caretaker function is not like a typical search and seizure,