On Point blog, page 4 of 8
Court of Appeals rejects challenge to factual basis for territorial jurisdiction
State v. Erik M. Smith, 2016AP2453-CR, District 3, 2/13/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The body of Eric Volp, a resident of Michigan when he disappeared, was found in a creek in Marinette County. After a long investigation Smith was eventually charged in Marinette County with killing Volp by running over him with his car and then hiding his corpse and he eventually pleaded guilty to most of the charges. (¶¶2-9). But as the criminal complaint itself acknowledged (¶7), the investigation never resolved whether Volp was killed in Marinette County or in Michigan. Despite that uncertainty the court of appeals holds there was sufficient factual basis to establish Wisconsin had territorial jurisdiction.
Challenge to competency of TPR court waived by failure to object
State v. J.M.W., 2017AP158, District 1, 9/6/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
J.M.W. contends the steps in the proceedings terminating his parental rights occurred out of order and therefore the circuit court lost competency to conduct a disposition hearing. The court of appeals holds he waived a competency challenge by not raising it in the circuit court first.
SCOW to decide whether Wisconsin recognizes a minimum age for criminal responsibility
State v. Shaun M. Sanders, 2015AP2328-CR, granting review of a published court of appeals decision, 6/13/17, case activity (including briefs
Issue (copied from the petition for review):
Can a person be criminally responsible for acts he allegedly committed before the age of original juvenile court jurisdiction?
Statutory amendment altering elements did not invalidate plea
State v. Richard J. Scott, 2017 WI App 40; case activity (including briefs)
Richard Scott seeks to withdraw his pleas to one count of repeated sexual assault of the same child and one count of possessing child pornography. As to the sexual assault count, he was charged under the wrong statute–a prior version. As to the child pornography, he argues that the complaint lacked a factual basis for the plea. The court of appeals rejects both challenges.
Adult court had jurisdiction, competency to adjudicate offenses committed before defendant was age 10
State v. Shaun M. Sanders, 2017 WI App 22, petition for review granted 6/13/17, affirmed, 2018 WI 51; case activity (including briefs)
When Sanders was 19 years old he was charged with committing repeated sexual assaults of H.S. during a time period when he was aged 9 to 12 and H.S. was aged 7 to 9. He asserts the circuit court had neither subject matter jurisdiction nor competency to proceed on those charges because under §§ 938.02(3m), 938.12(1), and 938.183(1)(am) persons who commit criminal acts when they are under the age of 10 are not subject to the juvenile justice code or the criminal code. The court of appeals rejects the claim.
Defendant forfeited challenge to improper treatment of second OWI as civil offense
Eau Claire County v. Duane D. Collier, 2016AP366, District 3, 2/22/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Collier’s belated challenge to his 1992 civil forfeiture judgment for OWI 1st offense is foreclosed by City of Eau Claire v. Booth, 2016 WI 65, 370 Wis. 2d 595, 882 N.W.2d 738.
Court had jurisdiction over OWI mistakenly charged as a criminal offense
State v. Timothy A. Giese, 2015AP1838-CR, District 3, 9/13/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The supreme court’s recent decision in City of Eau Claire v. Booth Britton, 2016 WI 65, disposes of Giese’s claim that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction over a mistakenly charged second-offense OWI.
SCOW says circuit courts never ever lack subject matter jurisdiction over OWIs or other matters
City of Eau Claire v. Melissa M. Booth Britton, 2016 WI 65, 7/12/16, reversing a circuit court order on bypass, case activity (including briefs)
OWI specialists, pay attention to this case! It abolishes subject matter jurisdiction challenges to improperly-charged 1st offense OWIs. Everyone else, pay attention too. Justice Abrahamson’s 33-page dissent offers a comprehensive analysis of how the majority opinion (written by R.G. Bradley) fundamentally misunderstands circuit court competency and subject matter jurisdiction and broadly impacts public policy as well as civil and criminal litigation.
City of Eau Claire v. Melissa Booth Britton, 2015AP869, review granted 12/3/15
On a bypass petition; case activity (including briefs)
Issues (from the appellant’s brief):
Does a circuit court lack subject matter jurisdiction to enter an OWI 1st offense civil judgment if a defendant has a prior unknown out-of-state OWI conviction?
Is a municipality legally precluded from pursuing a civil OWI citation if the defendant could also be charged criminally?
E pluribus unum: Court of Appeals addresses notice, unanimity, venue and statute of limitations issues arising from charging multiple thefts in a single count
State v. Jeffrey L. Elverman, 2015 WI App 91; case activity (including state’s brief)
The court rejects all challenges to a conviction of theft of more than $10,000. The issues mostly spring from the state’s use of Wis. Stat. § 971.36(4), which permits, under certain circumstances, the aggregation of multiple thefts into a single count.