On Point blog, page 37 of 87
Traffic forfeiture — speeding — defense of “necessity”
State v. Tammy S. Camden, 2012AP1451, District 4, 5/23/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court concluded a driver’s speeding was legally justified after accepting her testimony that she exceeded the speed limit in order to get away from a vehicle following in close proximity and copying her every move. The court of appeals reverses, concluding the defense of legal justification or “necessity”
Multiplicity — conviction for inchoate crime of conspiracy and completed crime under § 939.72(2). Constitutional right to speedy trial. Prosecutorial misconduct — failing to disclose sentencing consideration for a state’s witness
State v. Michael Lock, 2013 WI App 80; case activity
Multiplicity — conviction for conspiracy and for completed crime under § 939.72(2)
Lock was convicted of conspiracy to solicit prostitutes and conspiracy to pander between 1998 and 2003. Based on conduct in four specific months in 2002, he was also convicted of four counts of soliciting prostitutes as a party to the crime and four counts of pandering as party to the crime.
First Amendment — Speech — “True Threats.” Stalking and extortion — sufficiency of the evidence
State v. James D. Hills, 2012AP1901-CR, District 4, 4/11/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Hills sent letters and made at least one phone call to an assistant city attorney (ACA) who, he believed, had wrongfully prosecuted him under the city’s disorderly conduct ordinance. In those communications he berated the ACA (calling her incompetent, corrupt, dishonest, deceitful, worthless, and worse), accused her of prosecuting him with perjured testimony so she could collect money for the city,
Evidence sufficent to show parent/child go-kart ride amounts to physical abuse of child; ditto as to parent’s decision to treat injuries at home rather than seek medical attention
State v. Nicholas M. Gimino, 2012AP1498-CR, District II/IV, 3/7/13 (unpublished); case activity.
While this decision is not recommended for publication, it highlights a very touchy subject–when does conduct many parents engage in rise to the level of physical abuse of a child? The answer may surprise you.
Here’s what happened. Gimino took his 2-year-old daughter for a ride on a motorized go-kart having no sides or roof.
Disorderly conduct, § 947.01 — sufficiency of the evidence
State v. William G. Bennett, 2012AP1757-CR, District 2, 1/30/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Evidence that Bennett sent a lewd and obscene letter to a person was sufficient to support conviction for disorderly conduct because the content of the letter placed it beyond a mere “personal annoyance” to the victim. Purely written speech can constitute disorderly conduct even if that written speech fails to cause an actual disturbance,
Attempted possession of a firearm by a felon recognized as an offense under Wisconsin law
State v. Wyatt D. Henning, 2013 WI App 15; case activity
The crime of attempted possession of a firearm by a felon is recognized in Wisconsin, distinguishing State v. Briggs, 218 Wis. 2d 61, 579 N.W.2d 783 (Ct. App. 1998):
¶14 Turning to the particular language of the felon in possession of a firearm statute, and the case law further explaining the elements of that crime,
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,
OWI – probable cause to administer PBT
Dane County v. Steven D. Koehn, 2012AP1718, District 4, 1/10/13
Court of appeals decision (1 judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Motion to suppress evidence of intoxication properly denied because arresting officer had probable cause to administer a preliminary breath test. The court of appeals rejects Koehn’s claims that the officer’s failure to testify about the significance of the results of field sobriety tests means those results should have “minimal significance” in determining probable cause to administer the PBT:
¶10 I first conclude that,
OWI – Additional test for intoxication, § 343.305
State v. Stephen R. Tollaksen, Jr., 2012AP778-CR, District 4, 1/10/13
Court of appeals decision (1 judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The court of appeals affirms the denial of motion to suppress evidence of blood test results where circuit court found that Tollaksen had not requested an additional test to determine the presence of alcohol in his system. The record supported the circuit court’s acceptance of the officer’s testimony that Tollaksen did not request an additional test,
Search incident to arrest; unlawful possession of firearm, § 941.29
State v. Mark A. Sanders, 2013 WI App 4; case activity
Search incident to arrest — area within arrestee’s “immediate control”
Search of bed in room from which defendant emerged just before being arrested upheld under Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969), which permits an arresting officer to search the person arrested and the area within the arrestee’s “immediate control” in order to prevent the destruction of evidence of the crime and protect officers’ safety.