On Point: 9. Crimes

supreme court decision; court of appeals decision; for Fischer: James M. Shellow, Robin Shellow, Urszula Tempska

Note: federal habeas relief was subequently granted, Richard M. Fischer v. Ozaukee Co. Circ. Ct., ED Wis No. 10-C-553, 9/29/10.  Federal appellate and district court cases don’t bind Wisconsin courts, which therefore needn’t follow this habeas decision, e.g., State v. Mechtel, 176 Wis. 

court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication), reversed, 2011 WI 32; for Burris: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply

Answer to Jury Question – Misleading Definition of “Utter Disregard”
Trial court answer to jury question misleading as to whether jury could consider post-shooting conduct as bearing on “utter disregard” element, entitling Burris to new trial.

court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication)

Kidnapping – “Held to Service against Will”
“Held to service against will” element of kidnapping satisfied by “commands for information,” namely “interrogating [victim] as to where she was during the evening and who she was with,” ¶24.

court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication)

OWI – Probable Cause for PBT
Probable cause to administer PBT: rollover accident, odor of intoxicant, Tadych acknowledged drinking; also, PBT result admissible to establish probable cause to arrest.

court of appeals decision; for Puchacz: William M. Hayes
Resp Br

OWI Enhancer, § 346.65(2) – Out-of-State Conviction
Michigan convictions for driving while visibly impaired may be counted as Wisconsin OWI priors, given “broad interpretation and application of the final phrase in Wis. Stat. § 343.307(1)(d) and the public policy supporting our drunk driving laws,” ¶¶12-13.

Traffic Stop – Deviating from Center Line, § 346.05
Crossing center line,

court of appeals decision; for Fortun: Todd E. Schroeder
AG’s BiC; Resp Br; Reply

Forgery, § 943.38(1) – Altered Prescription
Altering the number of pills on a prescription and presenting the altered document to a pharmacist comes within the forgery statute, § 943.38(1).

court of appeals decision; for Fortun: Todd E. Schroeder

Forgery, § 943.38(1) – Altered Prescription (Increasing Number of Pills)
Altering the number of pills on a prescription and presenting the altered document to a pharmacist comes within the forgery statute, § 943.38(1).

court of appeals decision; for Haywood: Robert E. Haney

Battery to Peace Officer, § 940.20(2), Elements
It is no defense to battery-to-officer that the officer refused to leave the premises when the resident withdrew consent to enter, because acting “lawfully” is not an element of the offense: “a law-enforcement officer need not be acting ‘lawfully’ for what he or she does to be done in the officer’s ‘official capacity.’

court of appeals decision, for Patterson: David R. Karpe

Multiplicity – First-Degree Reckless Homicide by Delivery of Controlled Substance, § 940.02(2)(a) and Contributing to Delinquency Resulting in Death of Child, § 948.40(4)(a): Not Multiplicitous
Based largely on State v. Jimmie Davison, 2003 WI 89 (multiple convictions for battery permissible so long as multiple batteries have been charged), the court holds that § 939.66(2) permits conviction for both §§ 940.02(2)(a) and 948.04(4)(a),

court of appeals decision; for Freer: Suzanne L. Hagopian

Intimidation of Crime Victim, § 940.44(2), Intimidation Occurring after Complaint Filed
Intimidation of a crime victim, § 940.44(2), isn’t restricted to conduct occurring before the victim reports the crime to the police but, rather, covers conduct after the complaint has been filed:

¶24 In light of the LRB analysis, we conclude that the legislature intended the victim intimidation statute to prohibit any act of intimidation that seeks to prevent or dissuade a crime victim from assisting in the prosecution.