On Point blog, page 56 of 88
State v. Donovan M. Burris, 2009AP956-CR, Dist I, 1/26/10, Wis SCt review granted 9/21/10
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication), reversed, 2011 WI 32; for Burris: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply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.
State v. Jesse Becerra, 2009AP600-CR, Dist I, 1/20/10
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication)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.
State v. Bradley J. Tadych, 2009AP1911-CR, Dist II, 1/20/10
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.
State v. Stanley W. Puchacz, 2010 WI App 30
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,
State v. Rene L. Fortun, 2010 WI App 32
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).
State v. Rene L. Fortun, 2009AP1172-CR, Dist IV, 1/14/10
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).
State v. Dione Wendell Haywood, 2009 WI App 178
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.’
State v. Patrick R. Patterson, 2009 WI App 61, PFR 10/30/09
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),
State v. Stephen A. Freer, 2010 WI App 9, PFR filed
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.
State v. Christopher J. Lesik, 2010 WI App 12, PFR filed
court of appeals decision; for Lesik: Anthony Cotton
Overbreadth challenge to 948.02, sexual assault of a child
Sexual assault (intercourse) of a child, § 948.02, isn’t unconstitutionally overbroad, against a theory that it criminalizes acts undertaken for “proper medical purpose.” Although the statute is silent with respect to medical conduct, potential overbreadth may be cured through judicial construction and the court therefore “conclude(s) here that ‘sexual intercourse’ as used in the sexual assault of a child statute does not include ‘bona fide medical,