On Point: Uncategorized

S.C. Johnson v. Milton E. Morris, 2010 WI App 6, PFR filed 12/30/09

Issue/Holding: ¶5 n. 1:

We note that neither Russell’s nor Buske’s appellate counsel properly cite to the record. Record cites are often missing. An appellate court is improperly burdened where briefs fail to consistently and accurately cite to the record. Meyer v. Fronimades, 2 Wis.

court of appeals decision; for Garcia: Paul M. Ruby
Resp Br

Right to Testify – After-the-Fact Evidentiary Hearing
Remedy for failure to conduct colloquy required by State v. Weed, 2003 WI 85, doesn’t automatically result in new trial but, rather, supports postconviction evidentiary hearing.

Robert Zellner v. Herrick, et al., 2009 WI 80, on certification

Issue/Holding:

¶3        …  In this court’s standard order accepting the certification, we stated that “the appeal is accepted for consideration of all issues raised before the court of appeals.” See State v. Stoehr, 134 Wis. 2d 66, 70, 396 N.W.2d 177 (1986) (“When this court grants direct review upon certification,

Werner v. Hendry, 2009 WI App 103, PFR filed 7/17/09

Issue/Holding:

¶11      As a final matter, we observe that the appellant’s appendix fails to include the trial court’s reasoning. It is essential that the appendix include the record items truly relevant and essential to understanding the issues raised, particularly the trial court’s oral ruling. State v. Bons, 2007 WI App 124,

State v. Todd W. Berggren, 2009 WI App 82, PFR filed 6/24/09
For Berggren: Robert G. LeBell

Issue/Holding: Initial confinement totaling 36, and supervision of 17, years on sexual assault-related convictions wasn’t harsh and excessive:

¶48      Berggren’s sentence was not shocking, nor does it violate the judgment of reasonable people concerning what is right and proper under the circumstances. As the State points out,

State v. Kelly R. Ferguson, 2009 WI 50, reversing unpublished opinion
For Ferguson: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate

Issue/Holding: Where the police had undisputed probable cause to arrest Ferguson for disorderly conduct outside her apartment, but entered her apartment without a warrant to arrest her, they acted with “lawful authority” for purposes of obstructing, § 946.41, when transporting her away from the apartment,

State v. Pablo G. Quiroz, 2009 WI App 120
For Quiroz: Glen B. Kulkoski

Issue/Holding:

¶18      Law and Discussion: It is well established that evidence of flight has probative value as to guilt. See State v. Knighten, 212 Wis. 2d 833, 838-39, 569 N.W.2d 770 (Ct. App. 1997). Analytically, flight is an admission by conduct.

State v. Michael A. Sveum, 2009 WI App 81, affirmed on other grds., 2010 WI 92
For Sveum: Robert J. Kaiser, Jr.

Issue/Holding:

¶43      Sveum was convicted of aggravated stalking based on his 1996 stalking conviction. Proof of this particular aggravated stalking crime requires proof of a previous conviction for a violent crime or a stalking crime involving the same victim pursuant to Wis.

State v. Danny G. Harrell, 2008 WI App 37
For Harrell: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate

Issue/Holding: Expert opinion that Harrell is sexually violent was derived from his compelled, incriminatory statement and therefore also inadmissible, ¶¶14-35.

The court essentially tracks the discussion in Mark, which therefore won’t be repeated, and applies it to the particular facts. The court also reserves authority to remand for a “ Kastigar” hearing,

State ex rel. Adrian T. Hipp v. Murray, 2007 WI App 202, (AG’s) PFR filed 8/16/07Pro se

Issue/Holding: Review of a judge’s actions in a John Doe proceeding aren’t subject to direct appeal, but may be reviewed by writ of mandamus:

¶9 The parties agree that we review Judge Murray’s actions in connection with Hipp’s John Doe petition via mandamus. See State of Wisconsin ex rel.