On Point: 9. Crimes

State v. Dennis E. Scott, 2000 WI App 51, 234 Wis. 2d 129, 608 N.W.2d 753
For Scott: Joseph E. Redding

Issue: Whether the evidence was sufficient to support conviction for burglary/theft.

Holding: Evidence that defendant’s fingerprint was found on the “dock station” from which a lap-top was stolen from an office that sold only to other businesses and was not open to the public; and that defendant neither had worked nor had permission to be there sufficed to support the conviction.

State v. Jerome G. Semrau, 2000 WI App 54, 233 Wis. 2d 508, 608 N.W.2d 376
For Semrau: John D. Lubarsky, SPD, Madison Appellate

Issue: Whether the commission of felony bail jumping, by entering the complainant’s home in violation of bond conditions, supports burglary-entry of dwelling with intent to commit felony.

Holding: The underlying felony component of burglary must be a crime against persons or property; Semrau’s “core conduct”

State v. Scot A. Czarnecki, 2000 WI App 155, 237 Wis.2d 794, 615 N.W.2d 672
For Czarnecki: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate

Issue: Whether use of an assumed name in endorsing a check may subject the endorser to forgery charge.

Holding:

¶7        In further support of his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, Czarnecki argues that even if he endorsed the checks with the surname “Dougan,” there was nothing false or unlawful about these endorsements. 

State v. Peter J. Schaab, 2000 WI App 204, 238 Wis. 2d 598, 617 N.W.2d 872
For Schaab: Michael G. Artery

Issue: Whether the evidence supported bindover on bail jumping, where the allegedly violated bond condition allowed Schaab to have “incidental contact at work” with an individual, and Schaab was seen talking to the individual at the work site after Schaab was no longer employed there.

Holding: Bail jumping requires intentional violation of a bond condition,

State v. Jene R. Bodoh, 226 Wis.2d 718, 595 N.W.2d 330 (1999), affirming State v. Bodoh, 220 Wis.2d 102, 582 N.W.2d 440 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Bodoh: Michael D. Mandelman

Holding: A dog can be a dangerous weapon if used or intended or intended to be used in a manner calculated or likely to cause death or great bodily harm. (This holding has the effect of ratifying a prior court of appeals decision on this point,

State v. John V. Dundon, 226 Wis.2d 654, 594 N.W.2d 780 (1999), on certification
For Dundon: William S. Coleman, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate.

Holding:

¶36 In Coleman, we recognized that “a narrow defense of privilege under Wis. Stat. § 939.45(6) exists to a charge of felon in possession of a firearm.” Coleman, 206 Wis. 2d at 210.

State v. Richard L. Kittilstad, 231 Wis.2d 245, 603 N.W.2d 732 (1999), affirming State v. Kittilstad, 222 Wis.2d 204, 585 N.W.2d 925 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Kittilstad: Richard L. Wachowski

Issue: Whether threats to interfere with educational opportunity may amount to extortion under § 943.30(1).

Holding: A threat to interfere with education is tantamount to a threat to a “calling or trade,”

County of Kenosha v. C & S Management, 223 Wis.2d 373, 588 N.W.2d 236 (1999), on certification
For C & S: Robert R. Henak, and Shellow, Shellow & Glynn

Holdings:

• Obscenity statute, Wis. Stat. § 944.21 (1995-96), survives freedom-of-speech and void-for-vagueness challenges.
• Expert testimony on community standards isn’t constitutionally required; telephone survey wasn’t relevant, largely because it didn’t convey the explicitness of a video,

State v. Richard L. Kittilstad, 231 Wis.2d 245, 603 N.W.2d 732 (1999), affirming State v. Kittilstad, 222 Wis.2d 204, 585 N.W.2d 925 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Kittilstad: Richard L. Wachowski

Issue: Whether offering money in exchange for the opportunity to watch sex acts may amount to soliciting prostitution under § 944.32.

Holding: The statute requires that the defendant “solicit” someone “to practice prostitution.”

State v. Joel R. Zarnke, 224 Wis.2d 116, 589 N.W.2d 370 (1999), reversing and remanding, 215 Wis.2d 71, 572 N.W.2d 491 (Ct. App. 1997)
For Zarnke: Michael R. Cohen, Wachowski, Johnson & Cohen

Issue/Holding:

¶ The issue before the court is whether Wis. Stat. § 948.05 prohibiting the sexual exploitation of a child violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article I,