On Point blog, page 13 of 13
§ 940.01, Intentional Homicide — definitions – “human being” – fetus
State v. Deborah J.Z., 228 Wis.2d 468, 596 N.W.2d 490 (Ct. App. 1999), affirmed by equally divided vote, 225 Wis.2d 33, 590 N.W.2d 711 (1999)
For Deborah J.Z.: Sally Hoelzel
Holding: An unborn child is not a “human being” under the controlling definition in § 939.22(16), and the defendant therefore can’t be charged with attempting to kill and injure her fetus by excessive drinking during her pregnancy.
§ 940.02, First-degree reckless homicide — utter disregard for human life — sufficiency of evidence
State v. Audrey A. Edmunds, 229 Wis. 2d 67, 598 N.W.2d 290 (Ct. App. 1999)
For Edmunds: Dean A. Strang
Holding: “Utter disregard for human life,” an element of first-degree recklessness, derives from the old second-degree (depraved murder) statute. It imposes an objective test. Therefore, in this shaken baby death, it’s irrelevant whether Edmunds had “personal knowledge that vigorously shaking a twenty-two pound infant could subject her to the risk of serious injury”: a reasonable person would have known of the risk.
§ 940.10, Negligent Homicide by Operation of Vehicle — elements — objective standard for negligent conduct
State v. Derrick D. Johannes, 229 Wis. 2d 215, 598 N.W.2d 299 (Ct. App. 1999)
For Johannes: Gregory A. Petit
Holding: Johannes was convicted of several counts related to criminally negligent operation of a vehicle. The state’s theory was that Johannes crossed a centerline when he either fell asleep or played with a stereo. He now argues that the state had to prove that he knew that such conduct would cause him to cross the centerline.
§ 940.19(1), Battery – causing bodily harm, splashed with urine.
State v. Charles Dante Higgs, 230 Wis.2d 1, 601 N.W.2d 653 (Ct. App. 1999)
For Higgs: Joseph E. Redding
Issue: Whether splashing the victim’s face with urine satisfies the battery element of bodily harm.
Holding: The mere fact that urine struck the victim’s face isn’t enough to establish bodily harm, but the victim’s testimony that he felt stinging and burning satisfied the element.
§ 943.23(1r), Carjacking: Operating Vehicle Without Owner’s Consent Resulting in Death — Sufficiency of Evidence, Causation
State v. Earl L. Miller, 231 Wis.2d 447, 605 N.W.2d 567 (Ct. App. 1999)
For Miller: Eduardo M. Borda
Issue: Whether an act may satisfy the “substantial factor” test for causation element if it merely plays a prominent rather than lone role in the proscribed result.
Holding: Causation is satisfied by any significant, not necessarily the sole, factor resulting in death.
Miller was convicted of operating a vehicle without owner’s consent resulting in death (carjacking),
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis — Battery
State v. Charles Dante Higgs, 230 Wis.2d 1, 601 N.W.2d 653 (Ct. App. 1999)
For Higgs: Joseph E. Redding
Issue: Whether a sufficient factual basis was established on the element of bodily harm (where the defendant splashed the victim’s face with urine) to support a guilty plea to battery.
Holding: The mere fact that urine struck the victim’s face isn’t enough to establish bodily harm, but the victim’s preliminary hearing testimony that he felt stinging and burning satisfied the element.
§ 940.10, Negligent Homicide — corporate liability
State v. Steenberg Homes, 223 Wis.2d 511, 589 N.W.2d 668 (Ct. App. 1998)
Holding: Corporations are subject to criminal liability under Wis. Stat. § 940.10
§ 940.20(1), Battery by Prisoner — Elements — Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Damone J. Block, 222 Wis. 2d 586, 587 N.W.2d 914 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Block: James M. Weber
Issue/Holding:
Block’s next claim is that there was insufficient evidence to prove all of the elements of assault by a prisoner. Those elements are: (1) the defendant was a prisoner at the time of the offense, (2) the victim was an employee of the institution,
§ 940.32, Stalking – Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Michael A. Sveum, 220 Wis. 2d 396, 584 N.W.2d 137 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Sveum: Robert T. Ruth
Issue/Holding:
Johnson received several hang-up telephone calls on April 16, 1996. Sveum told Walls that he made the calls, and Walls relayed this information to Johnson. When asked how the phone calls made her feel, Johnson testified: “Scared. It was happening again.” She also testified that she “was very afraid”