On Point: Uncategorized

From the academy:

• Deirdre D. Brown, “One Strike and You’re Out: Padilla Advisement About Public Housing Eligibility” (“Attorneys must begin to recognize that there already exist an ethical and moral duty to advise clients of the collateral consequence of the loss of public housing eligibility and that this duty to advise meets the Sixth Amendment requirement for effective assistance to counsel.”)
• David S.

State v. Todd A. Schreiber, 2011AP1191-CR, District 1, 12/13/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Schreiber: Dustin C. Haskell, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; case activity

Lane deviations provided reasonable suspicion for traffic stop.

¶9        In applying these standards, we agree with the circuit court that Grunwald had sufficient reasonable suspicion to stop Schreiber.  Grunwald testified that he had five years of experience patrolling roads,

State v. Demonte D. Miller, 2011AP1069-CR, District 1, 12/6/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Miller: Hannah Blair Schieber, Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; case activity

Temporary stop of Miller not supported by reasonable suspicion under the following facts: Miller was part of “a quiet candlelight vigil for Miller’s best friend, who had been killed the night before”; as officers passed by,

 Posting will be light to non-existent till approximately November 16. Some links in the meantime:

Michael O’Hear, “Supreme Court Review: Overarching Themes”

Richard D. Friedman, “Coping with the Melendez-Diaz line”

Washington supreme court: county noise ordinance unconstitutional (maj. op.; diss1; diss2)

Margaret Flynt, “The Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon”

State v. Frank Plum, 2011AP956-CR, District 3, 11/1/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Plum: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity

The officer who stopped Plum for suspected drunk driving testified that Plum refused to answer questions about the type or amount of medication he had consumed: this amounted to an impermissible comment on Plum’s right to silence, notwithstanding that questioning occurred before custodial interrogation (thus,

Dane Co. DHS v. Lamont B., 2011AP1750, District 4, 10/27/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Lamont B.: Ann T. Bowe; case activity

The trial court properly exercised discretion in terminating parental rights, rather than dismissing the petition and transferring guardianship of the children to their foster parents pursuant to §§ 48.977(2) and § 48.427(3m)(c).

¶6        Six factors must be satisfied for a court to appoint a guardian under Wis.

State v. Tammi Zellmer, 2010AP1986, District 4, 10/27/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Zellmer: John D. Hyland; case activity

Probable cause to believe Zellmer was operating under the influence supported her arrest: she was speeding; the time, 2:50 a.m., was close to “bar time”; her eyes were glassy and bloodshot; she admitted to having drunk 2 beers and a mixed drink; her performance on field sobriety tests exhibited signs of intoxication.

State v. John E. Ahern, 2011AP898, District 2, 10/26/11

court of appeals decision(1-judge, not for publication); for Ahern: Dennis M. Melowski, Sarvan Singh; case activity

The officer had reasonable suspicion to “stop” Ahern’s vehicle for a noncriminal traffic violation, namely that the vehicle was parked in a roadway without affording other traffic sufficient room to drive around it.

¶10      At the time of the stop,

Florence County Dept. of Human Services v. Jennifer B., 2011AP384, District 3/1, 9/29/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Jennifer B.: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity

Because the record doesn’t clearly establish whether Jennifer B. voluntarily terminated her rights, entered a no-contest plea, or made an admission to the allegations in the petition, a new TPR hearing is required. The trial court didn’t sufficiently inquire into matters required of a voluntary consent to terminate,

State v. Kim R. Kallenberg, 2011AP276, District 2, 8/17/11

court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Miller: Kirk B. Obear, Casey J. Hoff; case activity

Lane deviation unaccompanied by signal provided adequate basis for stop.

¶8        We hold that there was probable cause that Kallenberg violated Wis. Stat. §§ 346.13(1) and 346.34(1)(b).  A driver preceding another has the duty to use the roadway in the usual manner with proper regard for all others using that road and to “properly signal his intentions to deviate from his line of travel.”  Burlison v.