On Point blog, page 3 of 6
Trial counsel held ineffective; DA chastised for taking advantage of deficient performance
State v. Charles C.S., Jr., 2014AP1045, 2/11/15, District 2 (not recommended for publication); click here for docket
Ouch! This is the rare case where the court of appeals found both the deficient performance and the prejudice required for an “ineffective assistance of trial counsel” claim. Such decisions can be hard on the defense attorney, but in this case the DA took a beating.
Court of appeals rejects defense challenge to shaken baby syndrome; finds old wine in new container
State v. Michael L. Cramer, 2012AP2547; District 1; October 15, 2013 (not recommended for publication); case activity
A jury convicted Cramer of 1st-degree reckless homicide for the death of his 10-week old son. Both the Milwaukee County medical examiner and the attending physician testified for the State at trial. In their opinions, the baby died from blunt force injuries, including trauma to the head and brain. The defendant’s expert testified that the baby’s injuries were caused by “resuscitated Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.”
Wisconsin Supreme Court: Ethics rule governing prosecutor’s duty to disclose information to defense is not more demanding than the constitutional duty to disclose
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Sharon A. Riek, 2103 WI 81 (per curiam), affirming referee’s dismissal of disciplinary complaint; case activity
The supreme court holds that a prosecutor’s duty to disclose information to the defense under SCR 20:3.8(f)(1) does not impose a broader duty to disclose than the constitutional duty imposed under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
Multiplicity — conviction for inchoate crime of conspiracy and completed crime under § 939.72(2). Constitutional right to speedy trial. Prosecutorial misconduct — failing to disclose sentencing consideration for a state’s witness
State v. Michael Lock, 2013 WI App 80; case activity
Multiplicity — conviction for conspiracy and for completed crime under § 939.72(2)
Lock was convicted of conspiracy to solicit prostitutes and conspiracy to pander between 1998 and 2003. Based on conduct in four specific months in 2002, he was also convicted of four counts of soliciting prostitutes as a party to the crime and four counts of pandering as party to the crime.
Exculpatory Evidence – Duty to Preserve
State v. Thomas R. McEssey, 2011AP2668-CR, District 4, 9/20/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
The police inadvertently destroyed a recording of a phone conversation between McEssey and the alleged victim. (A separate, but partial recording – containing only the latter’s side of the conversation – was made, misplaced, and belatedly disclosed to the defense.) Finding that the destruction of the recording of the full conversation was unintentional,
Other-Acts Evidence: Criminal-Enterprise Activity; Exculpatory Evidence: Disclosure in Fact Made; Appellate Procedure: Incomplete Record Supports Trial Decision
State v. Michael Anthony Lock, 2012 WI App 99 (recommended for publication); case activity
Other-Acts Evidence
Lock was tried and convicted for homicide, kidnapping and possession with intent to deliver. The State elicited testimony from numerous witnesses to the effect that Lock headed a vast criminal enterprise, of which these crimes were a part in that the two homicide victims were drug dealers, whom Lock killed (or ordered killed) over drug money.
Prosecutorial Vindictiveness: Not Found Following Rejected Plea Offer; Search & Seizure Exclusionary Rule: Inapplicable to Private Search
State v. Troy L. Cameron, 2012 WI App 93 (recommended for publication); case activity
Prosecutorial Vindictiveness – Neither Presumptive or Actual for Increased Charges Following Rejected Plea Offer
Cameron failed to establish prosecutorial vindictiveness in the filing of an amended information containing additional charges, after he rejected a plea offer to the original information. State v. Johnson, 2000 WI 12, 232 Wis.
Haseltine “Vouching” Rule: Inapplicable to Pre-trial Interrogation; Closing Argument: Waiver of Objection (Prosecutor Terming Defendant Liar)
State v. Andre L. Miller, 2012 WI App 68 (recommended for publication); for Miller: Jeffrey J. Guerard; case activity
Haseltine “Vouching” Rule
The anti-vouching rule of State v. Haseltine, 120 Wis. 2d 92, 352 N.W.2d 673 (Ct. App. 1984) (one witness may not comment on the credibility of another witness) isn’t applicable to a pre-trial interrogation during which the detective describes the defendant as lying.
Exculpatory Evidence – Police Personnel Records; Postconviction Procedure – Serial Litigation Bar: Supplement to Still-Pending Motion
State v. Christopher J. Anderson, 2009AP3053-CR, District 1, 3/27/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); pro se; case activity; prior history: 2008AP504-CR
Anderson’s prior appeal established that “the trial court erred when it denied his request for an in camera review of [police] personnel files because he had both a constitutional and statutory right to any exculpatory or impeachment evidence in the files,”
TPR – Closing Argument, GAL – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
State v. Corrine J., 2011AP1916 / State v. Dalvin C., Sr., 2011AP1882, District 1, 3/27/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Corrine J.: Melinda A. Swartz, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; for Dalvin C.: Jeffrey W. Jensen; case activity
Trial counsel’s failure to object to the guardian ad litem’s closing argument wasn’t prejudicial, given the strength of the case for terminating parental rights. (The argument, merits of which the court doesn’t reach,