Explore in-depth analysis
On Point is a judicial analysis blog written by members of the Wisconsin State Public Defenders. It includes cases from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, and the Supreme Court of the United States.
Important posts
Ahead in SCOW
Sign up
Defense win! COA strikes down statute permitting the refusal of warrantless blood test to enhance OWI penalties
State v. Scott William Forrett, 2021 WI App 31, petition for review granted, 9/14/21, affirmed, 2022 WI 37; case activity (including briefs)
Wisconsin permits a driver’s prior refusal to submit to a warrantless blood test as a criminal penalty enhancer for a subsequent OWI. In an open and shut opinion that is recommended for publication, the court of appeals just declared that statutory scheme unconstitutional based on Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (2016), and State v. Dalton, 2018 WI 85, 383 Wis. 2d 147, 914 N.W.2d 120.
SCOW to review collateral attacks on prior OWIs where the defendant was denied counsel
State v. Teresa L. Clark, 2020AP1058-CR, bypass granted 4/27/21; case activity
Issue: (adapted from State’s COA brief):
When the State uses a prior OWI conviction to enhance the charge and sentence for a subsequent OWI offense, a defendant may collaterally attack the prior conviction. If the defendant proves that her right to counsel was violated in the prior case, the conviction may not be used to enhance the charge and sentence in the new case. Does the burden shift to the State when there is no transcript available to show that the circuit court violated the defendant’s right to counsel?
April 2021 publication list
On April 28, 2021, the court of appeals ordered publication of the following criminal law related decisions: State v. Patrick A. Keller, 2021 WI App 22 (Confrontation Clause doesn’t apply to statements of mandatory child abuse reporter) State v. Markell Hogan, 2021 WI App 24 (cop can testify as human trafficking expert)
Search of car of non-student in school parking lot was reasonable
State v. Blong Simba Vang, 2021 WI App 28; case activity (including briefs)
The search of Vang’s car, which was parked on school property, was reasonable under the less stringent standard for searches of students established in New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 324 (1985), even though Vang wasn’t a student at the school.
Odor of burning weed justified warrantless entry of home
State v. B.W.R., 2020AP1726, District 2, 4/28/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The odor of marijuana gave police probable cause to believe evidence of a drug crime would be found in B.W.R.’s home and the odor plus the occupants’ awareness the police were knocking gave the police reason to conclude the evidence would be destroyed if they took time to get a warrant.
SCOW to take up transgender woman’s challenge to registry’s name-change ban
State v. C.G., 2018AP2205, review granted 4/27/21; case activity
Issues presented:
Does Wis. Stat. § 301.45, the statute governing juvenile sex offender registration, unconstitutionally infringe on Ella’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech by preventing her from legally changing her name to reflect her gender identity?
Does requiring Ella to register under Wis. Stat. § 301.45 amount to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment?
SCOW will address state’s subpoena to hospital for BAC records
State v. Daniel J. Van Linn, 2019AP1317, review granted 4/27/21; case activity (including briefs)
After Daniel Van Linn was arrested on suspicion of drunk driving, a sheriff’s deputy ordered his blood drawn for testing. This draw was illegal, and the circuit court excluded its fruit. After the suppression decision, the prosecutor applied for a subpoena to the hospital where Mr. Van Linn had been treated; the application included the results of the first, suppressed blood test. The court issued the subpoena and the hospital turned over evidence including the results of the blood alcohol test it had conducted. Was the state’s decision to seek this subpoena the fruit of its earlier, unlawful search, such that its results should have been suppressed?
SCOTUS: That stuff we said about not usually sentencing juveniles to life without parole? Nevermind.
Jones v. Mississippi, USSC No. 18-1259, 2021 WL 1566605, April 22, 2021; Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary)
“In a case involving [sentencing] an individual who was under 18 when he or she committed a homicide [to life without parole], a State’s discretionary sentencing system is both constitutionally necessary and constitutionally sufficient.” (Slip op. at 5) (emphasis added).
SCOTUS will decide whether Constitution protects carrying guns outside the home
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Corlett, USSC No. 20-843, Cert. granted 4/26/2021; Scotusblog page (containing links to briefs and commentary)
Question presented:
Whether the state of New York’s denial of petitioners’ applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.
Cops may extend traffic stops to ask drivers about their medications
State v. Kimberly Dale Crone, 2021 WI App 29; case activity (including briefs)
Think twice before driving with medication in your car or purse. This decision (recommended for publication) holds that when a sheriff stops a driver for simple speeding, and he admittedly lacks reasonable suspicion to inquire about medication bottles he sees in the driver’s purse, he may nevertheless extend the stop to ask the driver to consent to a search of those bottles per State v. Wright, 2019 WI 45, 386 Wis. 2d 495, 926 N.W.2d 157 and Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (2015).
On Point is sponsored by Wisconsin State Public Defenders. All content is subject to public disclosure. Comments are moderated. If you have questions about this blog, please email [email protected].
On Point provides information (not legal advice) about important developments in the law. Please note that this information may not be up to date. Viewing this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship with the Wisconsin State Public Defender. Readers should consult an attorney for their legal needs.