On Point blog, page 1 of 5
COA: Circuit court properly exercised its discretion in its evidentiary rulings at trial on grounds to terminate parental rights.
State v. D.J., 2025AP1334 and 1335, 9/16/25, District I (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Over the respondent’s evidentiary objections, the COA affirmed the circuit court’s orders terminating D.J.’s parental rights to two of her children.
COA rejects novel discovery claim and other challenges to child pornography conviction
State v. Jacob Richard Beyer, 2022AP2051, 1/11/24, District 4 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Although Beyer labors mightily at conjuring up legal arguments for reversal, COA is uniformly unpersuaded and unimpressed by his arguments and affirms.
COA upholds circuit court’s decision to exclude defendant’s proffered evidence regarding field sobriety tests at PAC trial
State v. Batterman, 2022AP181, 11/28/23, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
Given the discretionary standard of review used to assess a circuit court’s evidentiary rulings, COA wastes no time in upholding the court’s order excluding evidence the defendant did well on some field sobriety tests at a second offense PAC trial.
7th Circuit: Shackling during trial didn’t undermine right to present complete defense
Richard Shirley v. Lizzie Tegels, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 18-1713, 3/8/23
Shirley was shackled while he testified at his jury trial for 1st degree reckless homicide. In this federal habeas appeal, he argued that the shackling violated his constitutional right to present a complete defense. The 7th Circuit denied relief because no SCOTUS case clearly establishes that shackling a defendant while he is testifying violates that right.
COA affirms trial court’s refusal to permit testimony that OWI arrestee asked for breath test
State v. Travis D. Huss, 2021AP1858, 7/20/22, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Huss was stopped at 1 a.m. for going through a flashing red light without stopping. The officer suspected he was impaired and eventually arrested him for OWI. Huss asked the officer to give him a preliminary breath test before she arrested him, but the circuit court excluded evidence of his request from being admitted at trial. The court’s ruling was not an erroneous exercise of discretion.
COA splits on prejudice caused by counsel’s ineffective presentation of Denny defense
State v. General Grant Wilson, 2018AP183-CR, 1/12/21, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
This marks the 3rd time the court of appeals has addressed Wilson’s case. In this appeal, the sole question is whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel. The circuit court found deficient performance but not prejudice. Two judges, White and Blanchard affirm. Brash filed an 18-page dissent arguing that the cumulative effect of several deficiencies warrants a new trial.
Habeas win! 7th Circuit orders new trial due to denial of right to present complete defense
Shan Fieldman v. Christine Brannon, __F.3d__ (7th Cir. 2020)
Shan Fieldman climbed into a truck and told a hit man that he wanted his ex-wife and her boyfriend killed. Turns out the hit man was an undercover cop who videotaped their conversation. At trial the State played the video. Fieldman testified that he did not intend for the hit man to actually commit the murders, but he was barred from fully explaining why. He was convicted of soliciting murder for hire, lost his direct appeal, won habeas relief in the Southern District of Illinois, and now the 7th Circuit has affirmed.
Only the state’s evidence is admissible
State v. Daniel A. Griffin, 2019 WI App 49; case activity (including briefs)
Someone killed a young child in Griffin’s home. Both Griffin and the child’s mother were present at the time. What evidence was the jury allowed to hear about who committed the crime? If you guessed “any remotely relevant evidence implicating Griffin” (whom the state had charged) and “no evidence implicating the mother” (whom it had not) then you are a scholar of Wisconsin evidentiary law.
Defense win! Trial court should have admitted 3rd party perpetrator DNA evidence at reckless homicide trial
State v. Frederick Ramsey, 2017AP1318-CR, 5/29/19, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Ramsey confessed to the stabbing death of A.T., but it turns out that the DNA under her fingernails belonged to a guy named Teague. Ramsey filed a motion to admit the DNA evidence and to argue that Teague killed A.T., pursuant to State v. Denny, 120 Wis. 2d 614, 357 N.W.2d 12 (Ct. App. 1984). He lost, but then persuaded the court of appeals to grant an interlocutory appeal, and then won. Pretty impressive!
Court upholds convictions for multiple counts of sending unlawful emails, bail jumping
State v. Brian A. Barwick, 2017AP958-CR through 2017AP961-CR, District 1, 9/5/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Barwick was charged with eleven counts of various crimes in four separate cases that were consolidated for trial. He makes various unsuccessful challenges to his convictions.