On Point blog, page 1 of 26
COA calculates discharge date on sentences for crimes committed between 1999 and 2003 in published case.
State of Wisconsin ex rel. Christopher P. Kawleski v. State, 2022AP1129, 7/3/25, District IV, (recommended for publication); case activity
COA recommends publication in a case addressing how to calculate the maximum discharge date for a defendant sentenced to a bifurcated sentence on a felony between 1999 and 2003 upon release from reconfinement after extended supervision was revoked.
Defense win: COA reverses parts of juvenile restitution order
State v. C.J.L., 2024AP1917, 7/3/25, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
C.J.L. contests part of the restitution ordered in his juvenile case related to a theft and break in at a dance studio–restitution for a surveillance subscription purchased after the theft, and for damages to the studio’s dance floor. Because the juvenile statute, Wis. Stat. § 938.34(5)(a), permits restitution for physical injury to a person or damage to property only, the COA agrees with C.J.L. and reverses the restitution order.
Defense Win: COA finds exception to potential jurisdictional defect and reverses order denying early releasing following SAP completion
State v. Benny Burgos, 2024AP1497-CR, 6/3/25, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity
In an interesting appeal presenting questions of statutory construction and appellate jurisdiction, COA uses principles of equity to reach the merits and reverses in Burgos’s favor.
Defense Win: No causal nexus for restitution based on charges of harboring or aiding a felon
State v. Daecorion J. Robinson, 2022AP2087-CR, 5/28/25, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity
In a rare “causal nexus” win, 2 judges in D1 agree that the circuit court’s order was infirm. Under the text of the restitution statute, Robinson’s aiding a felon does not make him liable for the consequences of that felon’s underlying criminal conduct.
COA: Circuit court may use defendant’s federal disability payments to assess ability to pay restitution.
State v. Eric J. Joling, 2023AP1023-CR, 12/11/24, District II (recommended for publication); case activity
Federal law prohibits subjecting social security disability insurance payments (SSDI) to “execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process.” 42 U.S.C. § 407(a). In a decision recommended for publication, the Court of Appeals held that a circuit court may nevertheless use a defendant’s SSDI payments to calculate the ability to pay restitution.
COA upholds restitution award and denial of postconviction IAC claim
State v. Lynetta Lake, 2024AP115-CR, 11/12/24, District 1 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Lake pleaded guilty to negligent operation of a motor vehicle and hit and run of an attended vehicle. Following a hearing, the circuit court ordered restitution. Lake filed a postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to call two witnesses during the restitution hearing.
Defense Win! Defendant entitled to hearing to determine eligibility for SAP/CIP
State v. Les Paul Henderson, 2023AP2079-CR, 5/31/24, District IV (not recommended for publication); case activity
Although Henderson fails to persuade COA that a JOC making him eligible for early release programming controls, he does live to fight another day given COA’s order that he receive a hearing at which time the circuit court will have to exercise its discretion to determine his eligibility.
COA affirms orders denying return of property petition and imposing fine
State v. Andre L. Jones, 2023AP1535-CR, 2023AP1536-CR, 2023AP1537-CR and 2023AP1538-CR, 5/16/24, District IV(not recommended for publication); case activity
In a rare appeal of an order denying a motion for return of property, COA rejects a novel statutory construction argument by adhering to what it views as binding precedent.
Defense Win! COA reverses $40,000 restitution order as sanction for state’s abandonment of appeal
State v. Paul R. Noble, 2023AP1444-CR, 4/24/24, District II (one-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
While Noble’s arguments on appeal appear to have substantial merit, the court of appeals declines to address the merits because the state abandoned the appeal and thereby conceded that “Noble’s arguments are correct.”
COA opts for defense-friendly reading of Marsy’s Law in published juvenile defense win!
State v. M.L.J.N.L., 2021AP1437, 2/28/24, District IV (recommended for publication); case activity
In one of our first published decisions to address the impact of Marsy’s Law, COA accepts the agreed-upon position of both parties that Marsy’s Law does not alter the framework for assessing requests for juvenile restitution under § 938.34(5)(a).