On Point blog, page 5 of 5
Instructions — Omitted Element — “Fact-Law Distinction”
See summary of State v. Thomas Scott Bailey Smith, Sr., 2005 WI 104, here.
Omitted Issues – Stalking: Submission to Jury of Prior Conviction for “Violence” Despite Stipulation
State v. Jeffrey A. Warbelton, 2009 WI 6, affirming 2008 WI App 42
For Warbelton: Paul G. Lazotte, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: On a trial for stalking,
Arrest, Search Incident to – Timing
State v. Jordan A. Denk, 2008 WI 130, on certification
For Denk: Lora B. Cerone, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶33 We note at the outset that Officer Hahn testified he did not place Pickering under arrest until after he had performed searches of the eyeglass case and Denk’s clothing. This fact does not alter our analysis. In State v.
Plea Bargains – Validity: Illusory Plea Agreement – Applicability to Dismissed Charge
State v. Jordan A. Denk, 2008 WI 130, on certification
For Denk: Lora B. Cerone, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: Where a charge dismissed by the plea bargain arguably lacks factual basis, but the defendant receives the full benefit of the plea agreement as to the counts of conviction, an argument in favor of plea-withdrawal on the basis of an “illusory” plea bargain isn’t supported:
¶69 Denk contends that § 961.573(3) does not criminalize possession of paraphernalia related to personal use.
Arrest, Search Incident to – Automobile Passenger’s Property Incident to Arrest of Driver
State v. Jordan A. Denk, 2008 WI 130, on certification
For Denk: Lora B. Cerone, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether the police may search, incident to the arrest of the driver, a passenger’s personal belongings (in this instance: an eyeglass case) found outside the vehicle.
Holding:
¶56 The record indicates that Officer Hahn was concerned about the possible threat posed by Denk as well.
Consent – Authority: Driver, for Passenger
State v. Jordan A. Denk, 2008 WI 130, on certification
For Denk: Lora B. Cerone, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding: ¶20 n. 4:
… While Pickering could consent to a search of the vehicle, he could not consent to a search of his passenger. See State v. Matejka, 2001 WI 5, 241 Wis. 2d 52,
Enhancer – Construction – Prior Conviction Presumptively Elemental
State v. Jeffrey A. Warbelton, 2009 WI 6, affirming 2008 WI App 42
For Warbelton: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue/Holding:
¶21 …. The legislature has the authority to designate a prior conviction as a penalty enhancer rather than an element of the offense. Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at 246. Although the legislature is permitted to designate a prior conviction as a penalty enhancer,