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 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State v. Robert James Pope, Jr., 2019 WI 106, affirming an unpublished court of appeals opinion; case activity (including briefs)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 […]
The “progressive prosecutor” movement is good, but funding public defenders is better
So argues Premal Dharia in this new article on Salon.com. Yay for ending cash bail, increasing diversion programs, and dropping prosecution of minor cases. But these changes won’t have nearly as much impact on the nation’s indigent defense crisis as simply adequately funding public defenders.
SCOW will clarify the “strong proof of guilt” requirement for an Alford plea
State v. Kevin L. Nash, 2018AP731-CR, petition for review of a per curiam opinion granted 12/10/19, case activity (including briefs)
Issue presented:
When accepting a guilty plea under Alford v. North Carolina, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), a circuit court may find there is a factual basis for the plea only if there is “strong proof of guilt.” May a court find “strong proof of guilt” based only on the information contained in the criminal complaint, or must the court hear additional evidence before it can make that finding?
SCOW to address interplay between restitution statute, marital property statute, and contract law
State v. Ryan M. Muth, 2019AP875-CR, petition for review of per curiam opinion granted 12/11/19; case activity (including briefs)
Issues presented (based on petition and cross-petition for review):
-
Wisconsin’s marital property statutes provide that income accrued during marriage belongs to both spouses. Wisconsin’s restitution statute permits crime victims to recover “income lost” from the “filing of charges or cooperating in the investigation and prosecution of the crime.” Where a crime causes a person’s death, can the deceased person’s adult children recover their spouse’s lost income as restitution?
-
Where crime victims accept a civil settlement for lost wages and expenses, and the victims also seek restitution for lost wages and expenses, and where the defendant asserts “accord and sanctification,” does the defendant have to produce “extrinsic evidence” showing that the wages and expenses the victim received in the civil settlement are the same wages and expenses the victim seeks as criminal restitution?
SCOW will decide if cops can tow, search a legally parked car after giving ticket
State v. Alfonso Lorenzo Brooks, 2018AP1774, review of a per curiam decision granted 12/10/2019; reversed 6/25/20; case activity (including briefs)
Issue presented:
Whether the community caretaker exception permits law enforcement to inventory and tow a vehicle after discovering that the driver does not have a valid license, when the vehicle is lawfully parked and not obstructing traffic?
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.