On Point blog, page 2 of 3
Important appellate practice reminder: Rule governing references to victims in briefs takes effect July 1, 2015
Attention appellate practitioners: We are pleased to present this guest post by Andrea Cornwall, Regional Attorney Manager if the SPD’s Milwaukee Appellate Office, about the imminent change in the rules governing references to victims in appellate brief.
Guest Post: Shelley Fite on 7th Circuit decision that Machner doesn’t apply to IAC claims in federal court
Curtis J. Pidgeon v. Judy P. Smith, Warden, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 14-3158, 5/13/15
In a federal habeas case, the Seventh Circuit has confirmed that the Machner hearing, like New Glarus beer and squeaky cheese curds, is a Wisconsin anomaly. State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797 (Ct. App. 1979.) Special guest Shelley Fite (SPD alum turned Federal Defender staff attorney) explains what this federal court decision could mean for state court IAC claims.
Snaps for Marla!
After 33 years with the State Public Defender, Marla Stephens is retiring today. Wow what a career! Cheers to Marla!
Kelli Thompson and Mike Tobin, Wisconsin State Public Defender
Marla’s contributions to the agency and the profession will be greatly missed, especially her dedication to the SPD and our clients, her work ethic, her long tenure as Chair of the Judicial Council, and her excellent leadership of the SPD Appellate Division.
A Salute to Judge Ralph Adam Fine!
“No! Don’t ask me how I am. You already know the answer. I’m fine. I’m always Fine!”
Back in 2007, Judge Fine told De novo, the Appellate Practice Section’s newsletter: “I love every minute being on the court. It has been 19 years and yet it seems as if I joined the court just yesterday. It really does. I enjoy few things more than writing an opinion. I actually get a physical high out of doing it.
SCOW: Court’s failure to specify crime for which probable cause found didn’t invalidate bindover of juvenile charged in adult court
State v. Cortez Lorenzo Toliver, 2014 WI 85, 7/23/14, affirming an unpublished per curiam court of appeals decision; majority opinion by Justice Prosser; case activity
When a juvenile is charged with a crime that gives the criminal court exclusive original jurisdiction, § 970.032(1) expressly requires the judge conducting the preliminary hearing to find probable cause for the specific felony that gives the court jurisdiction. In this case the supreme court addresses what happens when the trial judge doesn’t follow the statute’s clear mandate. On Point asked Eileen Hirsch, an attorney with the SPD’s Madison Appellate Office and all-around juvenile law guru, to discuss the decision. Here’s her take:
SCOW: State can’t use defendant’s incriminating statements made as part of on-going, State-initiated, plea negotiations
State v. Rafeal Lyfold Myrick, 2014 WI 55, 7/10/14, affirming a published court of appeals decision; majority opinion by Justice Roggensack; case activity
When does negotiation become agreement? In State v. Myrick, the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s resolution of this question was critical in determining whether the State could use incriminating statements that the defendant had made at a co-defendant’s preliminary hearing. The issue arose because the plea negotiations (one theory) or the plea agreement (alternate theory) fell apart, leading to the defendant’s trial on the original homicide charge. On Point’s Special Guest Michael Tobin, Deputy SPD, offers his take on the issues.
Guest Post: Marcus Berghahn on the Court of Appeals decision upholding the use of hearsay at preliminary hearings
State v. Martin P. O’Brien, State v. Kathleen M. O’Brien, and State v. Charles E. Butts, 2013 WI App 97.
As briefly noted in a previous post, the Court of Appeals has upheld Wis. Stat. § 970.038, which makes hearsay admissible at preliminary hearings and allows bindover based solely on hearsay. On Point is pleased to present this guest post about the decision by Attorney Marcus Berghahn,
Guest Post: Rob Henak on 974.06 and SCOW’s new standard for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel
State v. Tramell Starks, 2013 WI 69, affirming an unpublished court of appeals decision, case activity. Majority opinion by Justice Gableman, with a dissent by Justice Bradley and joined by Chief Justice Abrahamson and Justice Crooks
On Point is pleased to present this guest post by Attorney Rob Henak, an expert on Wis. Stat. § 974.06 postconviction motions and ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.
Gideon @ 50: The Right to Counsel and the “Noble Ideal” of Equal Justice
By MICHAEL TOBIN, Deputy State Public Defender
The historic U.S. Supreme Court decision in Gideon v. Wainwright was a major step towards fairness and equality in our criminal justice system. This year’s 50th anniversary of the decision gives us reason to reflect on the effect of the decision.
Clarence Earl Gideon filed a handwritten petition challenging his conviction because the State of Florida had denied him the right to counsel.
Guest Post: Hon. Richard J. Sankovitz, “Teachable Moments and Missed Opportunities in Funk and Denson”
On Point is very pleased to present this Guest Post discussion of State v. Funk and State v. Denson, by the Honorable Richard J. Sankovitz, Milwaukee County Circuit Court. Feel free to submit comments in the box at the end of the Post.
Trial judges monitor the flurry of end-of-term Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions for new rules of decision and new procedures to be followed in our courts.