On Point blog, page 2 of 2
Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to testimony about recorded conversations in Spanish between the defendant and the victim
State v. Adamis Figueroa, 2013AP47-CR, District 1, 12/3/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the testimony of a police department employee about the content of two recorded conversations in Spanish between Figueroa and J.R., who alleged Figueroa had sexually assaulted her several years ago, when she was a child. (During one conversation J.R. wore a wire and spoke with Figueroa in person;
Erroneous admission of other acts evidence was harmless; letter written by attorney to victim at defendant’s behest was properly admitted
State v. Jeffrey A. Adamczak, 2013 WI App 150; case activity
Admission of other acts evidence
Adamczak was charged with sexual exploitation by a therapist in violation of Wis. Stat. § 940.22 for having sexual contact with Sabrina. He testified the contact occurred, but only after the patient-therapist relationship was over. (¶¶3, 5). Before trial the state moved to admit the testimony of Sarah and Gail,
Hearsay, Definitions – “Assertion,” § 908.01(1) – Expression of Fact, Condition or Opinion
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03
For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly
Issue/Holding1: “(W)e conclude that ‘assertion,’ as used in § 908.01(1) means an expression of a fact, condition, or opinion.” ¶38. And, the speaker must intend the utterance to be an “assertion” as thus defined, because “when a speaker does not intend to communicate anything, his or her sincerity is not in question and the need for cross-examination to test perception,
Hearsay, Definitions – “Statement,” § 908.01(1) – Truth of Matter Asserted
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03
For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly
Issue: Whether a homicide victim’s statement – “If I am not home in half an hour come looking for me” – was a hearsay “statement,” as defined in § 908.01(1), i.e., offered for the truth of the matter asserted.
Holding:
¶36. There is no dispute that an out-of-court instruction to do something is not hearsay when offered to prove that the instruction was given and,
Hearsay — Statement — Truth of Matter Asserted — Probative Value
State v. Michael A. Sveum, 220 Wis. 2d 396, 584 N.W.2d 137 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Sveum: Robert T. Ruth
Issue/Holding: Where the defendant sought admissibility of a statement by a non-testifying declarant on the basis that it was not offered for its truthfulness, but the statement would have probative value only if offered for truth of the matter asserted, it was inadmissible hearsay.