On Point blog, page 26 of 68
Police had reasonable suspicion to do a protective sweep of car for weapons; officer’s trial testimony didn’t vouch for another witness
State v. Terrance L. Ware, 2014AP378-CR, District 1, 12/30/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
The totality of the circumstances surrounding the investigative stop of Ware’s car gave the police reasonable suspicion that Ware or his passenger was dangerous and might have access to a weapon hidden in the car, justifying a protective search of the car for weapons. In addition, a police officer wasn’t vouching for another state’s witness by saying the witness “told the truth” after additional questioning.
SCOTUS: Rule 606(b) bars jurors’ testimony about information that wasn’t revealed during voir dire
Warger v. Shauers, USSC No. 13-517, 2014 WL 6885952 (December 9, 2014), affirming Warger v. Shauers, 721 F.3d 606 (8th Cir. 2013); Scotusblog page (includes links to briefs and commentary)
Resolving an issue that had split some federal circuit courts, the Supreme Court unanimously holds that Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) precludes a party seeking a new trial from using one juror’s affidavit or testimony about what another juror said in deliberations to demonstrate the other juror was dishonest during voir dire.
SCOW says ordering defendant to bare his platinum grill is ok; announces new opinion procedures
Practitioners take note. This opinion holds the seeds of controversy. SCOW’s ruling–that forcing a defendant to bare his teeth to the jury does not violate the 5th Amendment–is not so surprising. But Chief Justice Abrahamson’s concurrence, which announces the elimination of “opinion conferences” and new restrictions on the preparation of concurring and dissenting opinions seems alarming.
Certification as to authenticity of cell phone records was inadequate under § 909.02(12)
Nicole Marie Thomas v. Korry Ardell, 2014AP295, District 4, 11/13/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
The circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in refusing to admit cell phone records because the proponent of the evidence didn’t provide a proper foundation by presenting either the testimony of a qualified witness or a proper certification proving authenticity.
Counsel wasn’t ineffective for failing to request certain jury instructions or objecting to prosecutor’s closing
State v. Ryan P. O’Boyle, 2014AP80-CR, District 1, 11/4/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
O’Boyle’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are rejected because trial counsel’s performance wasn’t deficient.
Other acts evidence was harmless and PTAC amendment during trial was not prejudicial
State v. Sean T. Pugh, 2013AP1522-CR, District 3, 10/21/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
If the trial court erred in admitting evidence that Pugh had a prior conviction for an offense similar to the ones he was on trial for, the error was harmless, given the overwhelming evidence against him. In addition, the trial court properly allowed the state to amend the information to add party-to-a-crime modifiers because Pugh wasn’t prejudiced by the amendment.
Excluding impeachment testimony from witness’s attorney was harmless
State v. Anthony E. Henderson, 2013AP2515, District 1, 10/7/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
If the trial court erred in excluding a witness’s attorney from testifying to information that would have impeached the witness, that error was harmless.
Records that support claims defense counsel made at sentencing not enough to merit resentencing or sentence modification
State v. Anthony Herman Williams, 2014AP447-CR & 2014AP448-CR, District 1, 9/30/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity: 2014AP447-CR; 2014AP448-CR
Cell phone records that corroborate a claim Williams’s trial lawyer made at sentencing regarding contact between Williams and the victims don’t show that the sentencing court relied on inaccurate information because the records do little to corroborate the contact or support Williams’s version of events.
Recantation evidence didn’t satisfy newly-discovered evidence test
State v. Landris T. Jines, 2014AP132, District 1, 9/30/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
The recantations of Bartee, the victim, and Griffin, another state’s witness, don’t satisfy the newly-discovered evidence test because they are not sufficiently corroborated. Nor is there a reasonable probability a different result would be reached in a new trial with the recantation evidence.
Joinder of sexual assault claims and admission of evidence showing change in victim’s personality upheld
State v. John M. Lattimore, 2013AP911-CR, District 4, 9/11/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
Lattimore was convicted of 2nd-degree sexual assault with use of force and false imprisonment against S.M. He appealed trial court decisions to: (1) join a count of 3rd-degree sexual assault against a different victim, M.H., to S.M.’s trial, (2) exclude the text of a Facebook message sent by S.M.’s brother to the defendant right after the assault, and (3) admit testimony about S.M.’s personality change after the assault. He had no luck with the court of appeals.