On Point blog, page 1 of 1
Court of Appeals: Aiding buyer in drug sale can lead to Len Bias liability because it also aided dealer
State v. Terry L. Hibbard, 2022 WI App 53; case activity (including briefs)
In a decision that allows for a sweeping expansion of aiding and abetting prosecutions in Len Bias cases, the court of appeals holds that a person assisting only a buyer a drug transaction could also be prosecuted for reckless homicide if the buyer dies from using the drug because any act aiding the buyer in getting the drugs also necessarily aids the seller in making the delivery.
Evidence about “shooting party” sufficient to support endangering safety conviction
State v. Steven E. Steffek, 2015AP93-CR, District 2, 7/1/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The evidence was sufficient to convict Steffek of endangering safety by negligent handling of a dangerous weapon, § 941.20(1)(a), as a party to the crime, despite the fact there was no evidence that anyone was dodging bullets in a “zone of danger.”
Conspiracy – burden of proof on defendant’s claim of withdrawal
Smith v. U.S., USSC 11-8976, 1/9/13
United States Supreme Court decision, affirming United States v.Moore, 651 F.3d 30 (D.C. Cir. 2011)
Conspiracy – burden of proof on defendant’s claim of withdrawal
Petitioner’s claim lies at the intersection of a withdrawal defense and a statute-of-limitations defense. He asserts that once he presented evidence that he ended his membership in the conspiracy prior to the statute-of-limitations period,
Guilty Plea Colloquy: Party-to-a-Crime Liability
State v. Calvin L. Brown, 2012 WI 139 (recommended for publication); case activity
A guilty plea colloquy need not include an explanation of ptac liability when the defendant directly committed the crime:
¶13 … Although the trial court did not explain that, by directly committing the La Quinta robbery, Brown was “concerned” in its commission as defined by the party to a crime statute,
Sufficiency of Evidence: Standard of Review – Possession with Intent to Deliver; Right to Jury Trial – Apprendi – Harmless Error
State v. Roshawn Smith, 2012 WI 91, reversing in part, affirming in part unpublished decision; case activity
Standard of Review: Sufficiency of Evidence
¶29 We understand Smith’s central argument regarding the standard of review on the evidentiary question to be summed up in the proposition that a jury verdict of guilt[9] must be reversed on appeal if “[t]he inferences that may be drawn from the circumstantial evidence are as consistent with innocence as with guilt.”