On Point blog, page 3 of 4
Statute of limitations, § 939.74(1) — sufficiency of “John Doe” complaint’s identification of defendant for purposes of tolling statute of limitations; denial of right to self-representation or to substitution of counsel
State v. Rodney Washington, 2012AP1015-CR, District 1, 3/26/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Statute of limitations, § 939.74(1) — sufficiency of “John Doe” complaint’s identification of defendant for purposes of tolling statute of limitations
The crimes in this case—sexual assault and robbery—were alleged to have occurred in 1994 and 1995. In 2000, eleven days before the statute of limitations was to run,
Right to unanimous jury verdict; continuing course of conduct chargeable as one count
State v. David J. Galarowicz, 2012AP933-CR, District 3, 12/11/12
court of appeals decision (1 judge; not eligible for publication); case activity
Galarowicz was not denied his right to a unanimous jury verdict on one count of disorderly conduct where the evidence showed an incident of disorderly conduct with the victim in the residence and additional conduct with the same victim in the residence after a twenty-minute pause.
Complaint – Adequate Notice; Jury Instructions – Authorizing Guilty Verdict on Speculation
State v. Darryl J. Badzinski, 2011AP2905-CR, District 1, 11/27/12; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication), petition for review granted 4/18/13; reversed, 2014 WI 6; case activity
Complaint – Adequate Notice (Child Sexual Assault) – Waived Objection
Badzinski waived his objection to the complaint – counsel conceded, at a motion to dismiss because of vagueness,
Charging Document (Complaint) – Notice – Mandatory Minimum
State v. Harry Thompson, 2012 WI 90, reversing unpublished decision; case activity
Section 970.02(1)(a) imposes several mandatory duties at initial appearance: the judge must inform the defendant of the charge, furnish him with a copy of the complaint, and personally inform him of the penalties for any felonies in the charge; and, the complaint must set forth the possible penalties, ¶62. These obligations apply to any offense in the complaint carrying a mandatory minimum sentence,
State v. Leilani E. Neumann, 2011AP1105-CR / State v. Dale R. Neumann, 2011AP1044-CR, rev. granted 6/13/12
on review of certification request; for Leilani Neumann: Byron C. Lichstein; case activity; for Dale Neumann: Stephen L. Miller; case activity
Reckless Homicide and “Faith Healing” as Substitute for Medical Treatment
Issues (Composed by On Point):
1. Whether the “faith healing” defense in § 948.03(6) is limited to prosecutions for child abuse or extends to reckless homicide, § 940.06(1).
2.
Charge Duplicity – Juror Unanimity
State v. Darryl P. Benson, 2010AP2455-CR, District 1, 5/8/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Benson: Mary Scholle, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; case activity
Sexual assault charges were not duplicitous, and in any event, potential unanimity problem was resolved by the instructions:
¶17 To begin, we conclude that the amended information properly notified Benson of the charges against him. The counts were set forth with enough specificity to allow Benson to plead and defend himself and to protect him from being tried twice for the same offense.
State v. Leilani E. Neumann, 2011AP1105-CR / State v. Dale R. Neumann, 2011AP1044-CR, District 3, 5/1/12
court of appeals certification, review granted, 6/13/12; for Leilani Neumann: Byron C. Lichstein; case activity; for Dale Neumann: Stephen L. Miller; case activity
Reckless Homicide and “Faith Healing” as Substitute for Medical Treatment
Convicted of reckless homicide, § 940.06(1), in the death of their daughter for failing to obtain medical treatment, the Neumanns raise various issues relating to interplay with the right to rely on prayer as treatment,
Charging Document: Notice of Nature of Charge – Element of Force Omitted; Sentencing: Inaccurate Information – Misperceived Mandatory Minimum
State v. Lamont L. Travis, 2012 WI App 46 (recommended for publication), petition for review granted, 9/18/12; case activity
For unsuccessfully trying to put his hand down his 10-year-old niece’s pants, Travis was charged with, and pleaded guilty to, attempted first-degree sexual assault of a child under age 12, §§ 939.32, 948.02(1)(d). However, that particular form of assault requires use or threat of use of force and violence,
Complaint – Probable Cause, Generally; Complaint, Violating Foreign Protection Order, § 813.128(2) – Sufficiency
State v. Timothy Jon Eloe, 2011AP1970-CR, District 2, 2/29/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Eloe: John C. Orth; case activity
¶5 To be sufficient, a criminal complaint need only be minimally adequate in setting forth essential facts establishing probable cause. State v. Adams, 152 Wis. 2d 68, 73, 447 N.W.2d 90 (Ct. App. 1989). Further, the adequacy of the complaint is to be evaluated “in a common sense rather than a hypertechnical manner.” Id.
Sexual Assault; Charging Document; Excited Utterances; Newly Discovered Evidence
State v. Dion M. Echols, 2010AP2626-CR, District 1, 9/27/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Echols: Amelia L. Bizzaro; case activity
Evidence held sufficient to establish “great bodily harm” element of 1st-degree sexual assault, § 940.225(1)(a), where the harm was inflicted a short time after the assault.
¶23 In this case, the trial court properly determined that Echols’ shooting M.F. subsequent to the nonconsensual sexual contact constituted great bodily harm.