On Point blog, page 6 of 24
COA orders new trial in CHIPS proceeding because circuit court excluded evidence that respondent executed power of attorney to guarantee child’s care while she was in custody
State v. A.C.S, 2024AP1634, 9/10/25, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA reversed the circuit court’s dispositional order entered after a jury found “Anna’s” child was in need of protection or services (CHIPS) and ordered a new trial because the court excluded evidence that Anna executed a power of attorney to guarantee the child’s care while she was in custody.
Seventh Circuit cases for August
Buckle up! August was a busy month for the 7th, with many interesting cases decided including a defense lawyer telling the jury he believed the child victim during closing arguments, a couple of habeas cases, a discussion on the difference between direct and other acts evidence, false arrest for suspected animal abuse, an interesting decision on counsel’s obligation to litigate unsettled law, and so much more!
SCOTUS stays district court’s order preventing ICE agents from making investigatory stops without individualized reasonable suspicion
Noem v. Perdomo, USSC No. 25A169, 9/8/2025, Scotusblog page
SCOTUS stayed a district court’s order enjoining immigration agents from conducting stops in the Los Angeles area unless the agent has reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is within the United States in violation of immigration law.
COA affirms order denying child’s request for change of placement in CHIPS case
Sheboygan County DH & HS v. N.H. & E.H., 2025AP903-FT, 9/10/25, District 2 (one-judge decison; ineligible for publication); case activity
“Luke” appeals from an order denying his request to change his placement back to his father’s home in a CHIPS case. COA affirms.
COA holds circuit courts may preclude parents from participating virtually at TPR disposition
State v. G.W., 2025AP1214, 9/3/25, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity
G.W. appeals from the circuit court’s order terminating his parental rights to his daughter, arguing that the circuit court denied him due process and erroneously exercised its discretion when it did not allow him to appear virtually at the dispositional hearing. COA affirms.
OLR revokes license of criminal defense attorney whose conduct led to two clients receiving new trials
OLR v. Peter J. Kovac, 2024AP1511-D, 8/15/25, per curiam decision of the Wisconsin Supreme Court (in its disciplinary capacity).
In a decision overlapping with our focus on criminal appeals, SCOW revokes the license of a criminal defense attorney whose misconduct covers both trial and postconviction representation of two clients.
COA: Defendant forfeits argument for discovery violation because no objection made at trial
State v. Rebecca Lea Kamm, 2024AP1944-CR, 8/28/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA held that the defendant forfeited her argument that the State did not comply with Wis. Stat. § 971.23(1) by not disclosing to her counsel video evidence within a reasonable time before trial. Although the evidence was not provided to counsel until the morning of trial, the issue was forfeited because counsel did not object to its admission.
COA rejects challenges to involuntary commitment and medication orders
Brown County v. M.J., 2025AP116, 8/26/25, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity
In a Chapter 51 appeal presenting familiar legal challenges, COA avoids some of the stickier legal issues on a path toward affirmance.
COA concludes testimony alone, with no physical evidence, is sufficient to affirm conviction for driving faster than was reasonable and prudent.
Dane County v. Trent Joseph Meyer, 2024AP1630, 8/14/25, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed a conviction for driving faster than was reasonable and prudent under the conditions where the defendant drove 20 miles-per-hour above the speed limit and came “close” to other cars’ bumpers.
COA approves what appears to be the 20th extension of an involuntary mental commitment order despite doctor’s “concerns” about medication regimen
Racine County v. D.S. 2025AP758-FT, 8/6/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
COA rejects a battery of challenges to D.S.’s involuntary commitment and medication despite sharing some of the examining physician’s “concerns” about her situation.