On Point blog, page 4 of 16
COA approves joinder of counts, holds evidence can’t be “newly discovered” if it’s new
State v. Alijouwon T. Watkins, 2019AP1996-CR, 5/27/21, District 4 (recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The state charged Watkins with several crimes stemming from a domestic violence call: these included escape and battery to one of the police officers who arrested him. While Watkins was in jail, the state charged him with three more crimes related to his alleged attempts to secure perjured testimony about the earlier incident and, the state said, have the arresting officer/alleged victim killed.
“Marsy’s Law” gives a crime victim standing to get involved in Shiffra-Green litigation
State & T.A.J. v. Alan S. Johnson, 2020 WI App 73, petition to review granted, 2/26/21; case activity (including briefs)
This is the first of what will likely be a series of appellate court decisions that re-make criminal litigation in light of “Marsy’s Law,” the recently-passed crime victims’ rights amendment to Article I, § 9m, of the Wisconsin constitution.
COA denies Bangert plea withdrawal
State v. Victoria L. Conley, 2019AP902, 9/10/20, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Conley pleaded to one count of disorderly conduct related to a couple of altercations occurring over a few minutes in Madison. After sentencing she moved to withdraw her plea alleging that the court failed to apprise her of the nature of the charge, and that she did not otherwise understand. The court of appeals holds that, assuming the colloquy was deficient, the record shows she understood the charges.
Defendant is denied a new trial, but wins resentencing
State v. Bobby L. McNeil, 2019AP467-CR & 2019468-CR, District 1, 7/21/10 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
McNeil was convicted of drug offenses, obstructing, and bail jumping after a trial in two consolidated cases. His challenges to the joinder of the cases and to various evidentiary issues are rejected, but he prevails on the challenge to his sentence because the circuit court relied on inaccurate information at sentencing.
SCOW: 7 misdemeanor retail thefts can =1 felony theft
State v. Autumn Marie Love Lopez & State v. Amy J. Rodriguez, 2019 WI 101, 11/27/19, affirming a published court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)
This appeal asked whether the State may charge multiple acts of misdemeanor retail theft under §943.50 as one felony under §971.36(3)(a). The justices split 3-2-2. Five of them answered “yes,” but did not fully agree on a rationale for that mandate. The justices also disagreed over the role titles play in statutory construction and over whether both appellants in a consolidated appeal must file a petition for review.
COA finds no error in denying mistrial for 3 evidentiary issues
State v. Ross Harris, Jr., 2018AP1667, 10/24/2019, District 4 (one-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The charges in this case, disorderly conduct and battery, arose from an altercation in a hospital elevator. The state said Harris, newly a grandfather, had attacked A.D., the fiancé of his newborn grandchild’s maternal grandmother, while both were visiting the baby. Harris said it was A.D. who had attacked him.
SCOW muddles confrontation, hearsay analysis; addresses Miranda at John Doe proceeding
State v. Peter J. Hanson, 2019 WI 63, 6/5/19, affirming an unpublished decision of the court of appeals; case activity (including briefs)
Hanson was called to testify at a John Doe proceeding looking into an unsolved homicide. He was eventually charged with the crime, and at his trial the jury heard a portion of Hanson’s John Doe testimony. The supreme court held the admission of this evidence didn’t violate Hanson’s right to confrontation. The court also holds that Hanson’s John Doe testimony was admissible despite the lack of Miranda warnings because that warning isn’t required at a John Doe proceeding.
SCOW will weigh in on aggregation of retail theft charges
State v. Autumn Marie Love Lopez & Amy J. Rodriguez, 2017AP913-CR & 2017AP914-CR, petition for review granted 4/9/19; case activity (including briefs)
Issue:
Does either Wis. Stat. § 971.36 or inherent prosecutorial charging discretion allow a prosecutor to charge a single felony count of retail theft for multiple separate acts of theft, each involving less than $500 in merchandise, committed over a span of time?
Circuit court’s failure to sever didn’t deny defendant’s fair trial rights
State v. Jarmel Dontra Chisem, 2017AP1114-CR, 3/5/19, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Chisem, facing charges of first degree reckless homicide and first degree recklessly endangering safety, moved to sever his case from that of his co-defendant, Davis. The court of appeals holds trying the two together was fine.
Defense win! Circuit court erroneously denied State’s motion to dismiss and then to amend charge
State v. Esmeralda Rivera-Hernandez, 2018AP311-312-CR, 2/20/19, District 2 (1-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
DAs have almost limitless discretion in deciding whether to initiate a prosecution. But their discretion to terminate a prosecution is subject to independent review by the circuit court, which must consider the public’s interest in: (1) the proper enforcement of its laws, and (2) deferring to the prosecutor’s legitimate discretion. See State v. Kenyon, 85 Wis. 2d 36, 45, 270 N.W.2d 170 (1978). In this case, the court of appeals holds the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion when it considered (1) but not (2).