On Point blog, page 51 of 53
Guilty Pleas: Colloquy – Deportation
State v. Hou Erik Vang, 2010 WI App 118; for Vang: John L. Sesini; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶1 Hou Vang appeals an order denying his motion to withdraw his no contest pleas to second-degree sexual assault of a child and felony bail jumping. Vang argues WIS. STAT. §§ 971.08(1)(c), (2)[1] entitle him to withdraw his pleas because, although the circuit court provided the statutory deportation warning at his arraignment,
Search-Incident: Automobile; Sufficiency of Evidence: Manufacturing THC
State v. Timothy Charles Bauer, 2010 WI App 93; for Bauer: Catherine M. Canright; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Search-Incident – Automobile
By failing to address Bauer’s Arizona v. Gant argument, instead relying solely on State v. Fry, 131 Wis. 2d 153, 174, 388 N.W.2d 565 (1986), the States’ argument compels the court to reverse the suppression order:
¶9 Here,
OWI – PAC: Timing of Countable Prior Convictions
State v. Brian K. Sowatzke, 2010 WI App 81; for Sowatzke: Andrew R. Walter; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶13 Sowatzke had two countable OWI “convictions, suspensions or revocations” (i.e., he had two OWI convictions) at the time he was arrested on May 9; he had a BAC of 0.048 percent at the time he was arrested on May 9; his legal BAC limit was 0.08 percent at the time he was arrested on May 9.
Jefferson v. Upton, USSC No. 09-8852, 5/24/10
United States Supreme Court per curiam decision
Habeas Review
Petitioner Lawrence Jefferson, who has been sentenced to death, claimed in both state and federal courts that his lawyers were constitutionally inadequate because they failed to investigate a traumatic head injury that he suffered as a child. The state court rejected that claim after making a finding that the attorneys were advised by an expert that such investigation was unnecessary.
Misconduct in Public Office, § 946.12(3) – Venue, § 971.19(12)
State v. Scott R. Jensen, 2010 WI 38, reversing 2009 WI App 26, prior history omitted; for Jensen: Robert H. Friebert; BiC; Resp.; Reply
¶1 … The issue presented is whether Waukesha County Circuit Court is the proper venue for Jensen’s trial because it is the “circuit court for the county where the defendant resides”
Juvenile Sentence of Life without Parole Unconstitutional
Graham v. Florida, USSC No. 08-7412, 5/17/10
In sum, penological theory is not adequate to justify life without parole for juvenile nonhomicide offenders. This determination; the limited culpability of juvenile nonhomicide offenders; and the severity of life without parole sentences all lead to the conclusion that the sentencing practice under consideration is cruel and unusual. This Court now holds that for a juvenile offender who did not commit homicide the Eighth Amendment forbids the sentence of life without parole.
State v. Thomas Q. Ruby, 2008AP2277-CR, Dist II, 1/13/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge; not recommended for publication)
Guilty Plea – Hearing on Motion to Withdraw
Ruby satisfied burden of production, therefore was entitled to postconviction hearing, on plea-withdrawal due to ignorance of elements and/or maximum penalty.
Counsel: Failed but Adequate Investigation; Interest-of-Justice Review: Critical Evidence (Absence of Herpes) Not Heard by Jury
State v. Jeffrey A.W., 2010 WI App 29; for Jeffrey A.W.: Hans P. Koesser
Adequacy of Counsel Investigation
Counsel’s attempt to demonstrate the absence of herpes in the defendant—an issue central to this sexual assault prosecution—was, although a failure, not the product of deficient performance.
¶12 There is no question that trial counsel’s investigation yielded the wrong information. But that does not necessarily equate to deficient performance.
TPR – Indian Child Welfare Act, Applicability: Not Limited to Physical Custody
Monroe County DHS v. Luis R., 2009 WI App 109
Issue: Whether ICWA, 25 U.S.C. § 1912(f), which requires likely serious emotional or physical damage to the child from continued parental custody, applies to placement outside the parental home when the TPR proceeding is initiated.
Holding:
¶18 The ICWA does not preempt the Wisconsin Children’s Code, and Wisconsin statutes can be harmonized with the federal law by applying any state law safeguards beyond those mandated by the ICWA.
TPR – Withdrawal of Element (Parental Unfitness) from Jury Consideration Amounted to Denial of Jury Trial
Manitowoc County HSD v. Allen J., 2008 WI App 137
Issue/Holding:
¶1 Allen J. appeals from orders terminating his parental rights to his children, Brandon [1] and Stephanie J. He argues that he was deprived of his right to a jury trial because the court, rather than the jury, answered one of the verdict questions on an element of parental unfitness. Allen’s counsel had stipulated that the element was satisfied,