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
Court rejects child’s challenges to termination of her parents’ rights
State v. D.I.H., 2019AP1874, District 1, 12/27/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
D.I.H. challenges the order terminating the parental rights of her mother and father, arguing the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion in concluding that termination was in her best interests. The court of appeals affirms.
COA holds father failed to assume parental responsibility
Adoptions of Wisconsin, Inc. v. N.R.K., 2019AP1726, 12/27/19, District 3 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Here the court of appeals upholds the termination of a biological father’s parental rights, concluding that he failed to assume parental responsibility.
SCOTUS cert petition asks whether blood test refusal is admissible in drunk-driving trial
Pennsylvania, like Wisconsin, has a statute permitting the prosecution at a drunk-driving trial to introduce evidence that a defendant refused a requested blood draw. Do such statutes comply with the Fourth Amendment where the defendant refused a warrantless blood draw and no constitutional exception applied? For an argument that they don’t, see the cert petition filed last month in Thomas Bell v. Pennsylvania.
Do Strickland and Padilla apply to “unauthorized” immigrants?
According to a cert petition that SCOTUSblog has named a “petition of the week,” courts are split on this issue. See the question presented below. This petition is pending (not granted). We’ll keep you posted on its status.
In Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) and Lee v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1958 (2017), this Court held that lawful permanent residents that received deficient advice regarding immigration-law consequences of a plea can assert claims under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Although this Court has not yet addressed how these precedents apply to unlawfully present aliens, the lower courts are deeply divided as to how they do.
Court of appeals infers juror’s impartiality from silence in response to question
State v. N.M.A.-S., 2018AP2308-09, 12/17/19, District 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This TPR case involves a mom with a substance abuse problem and her daughter who had ingested morphine. At the trial on grounds, defense counsel asked the jury pool: “Is there anyone that believes that someone who is struggling with an addiction currently is not fit to parent their children?”
December 2019 publication list
On December 18, 2019, the court of appeals ordered publication of the following criminal law related cases: State v. Brian L. Halverson, 2019 WI App 66 (incarceration is no longer custody per se under Miranda) State v. Jeffrey L. Ionescu, 2019 WI App 68 (“warm” pursuit is as good as “hot” pursuit, at least in […]
SCOW holds defendants abandoned by counsel to same standards as licensed lawyers
State v. Robert James Pope, Jr., 2019 WI 106, affirming an unpublished court of appeals opinion; case activity (including briefs)
In the most absurd decision this term (still time for worse), SCOW has denied a defendant sentenced to life without parole both a direct appeal and a new trial because the court system destroyed all of his trial transcripts. The defendant “sat on his rights,” said the majority opinion, written by Justice Ziegler. When his lawyer failed to file a timely notice of intent to pursue postconviction relief, he should have immediately, without counsel, figured out how to defend his appeal rights and effectively defended them. He didn’t. No relief.
Defense win! No community caretaker basis to seize people sitting in car in parking lot
Wood County v. Trevor J. Krizan, 2019AP350, 12/12/19, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A sheriff’s deputy on patrol at 2:00 a.m. happened by a parking lot for a boat landing. The lot was open to the public 24 hours a day, and he saw a vehicle parked, not running, with its lights off. The officer pulled behind it and shined his spotlight and “takedown lights” (these are apparently very bright lights that may temporarily blind occupants of a vehicle on which they are shined) at the car. He saw two occupants and no signs of distress, but he approached the vehicle, spoke to the occupants, and took their identification. Eventually he noted signs of intoxication that led to Krizan’s arrest for first-offense OWI. But Krizan challenged the stop and won in the trial court, and the county appealed.
SCOTUS declines to hear major case on homelessness
Normally we report on that cert petitions that SCOTUS grants, not the ones that it denies. But this is an interesting case. The City of Boise Idaho tried to regulate camping and sleeping in public places. The 9th Circuit held that the enforcement of such laws constitute cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the 8th […]
Treating substance use and mental health disorders in prison
You know the grim statistics. an estimated 65% of people in U.S. prisons and jails have a diagnosable substance use disorder and about 15% of men and 30% of women have mental health disorders. According to this new paper by Leo Beletsky at Northeastern University School of Law, correctional facilities’ efforts to address these conditions […]
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.