On Point

State v. Michael Joseph Gasper, 2023AP2319, 10/30/24, District 2 (recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)

The circuit court held that an officer’s warrantless inspection of a cyber tip digital video file provided to the officer and identified as child pornography by a private internet service provider constituted an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The COA concludes that Gasper did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the video, which he uploaded to Snapchat in violation of the terms of service and reverses.

The Seventh Circuit has been quiet as of late; accordingly, we tried to consolidate the recap for our readers here:

State v. M.M.K., 2024AP591-CR, 2024AP592-CR, 2024AP593-CR, 2024AP594-CR, 10/31/24, District IV(1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

In a case which continues a new trend in appeals of involuntary medication appeals, COA holds that while the circuit court correctly found M.M.K. incompetent, it failed to correctly apply Sell in ordering involuntary medication.

State v. T.H.-M., 2024AP1271-1273, District I, 10/29/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

In another dense and fact-specific opinion, COA holds that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the parent was unfit and rejects T.H.-M.’s argument that the circuit court improperly weighed the evidence at disposition.

Waukesha County Dept. of Health & Human Services v. M.M.M., 2024AP1622, 10/30/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

In a straightforward case addressing sufficiency of the evidence, the COA affirmed the circuit court’s order to terminate M.M.M’s (referred to as Mary) parental rights.  The Court found that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict finding grounds to terminate her parental rights, and the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion when it determined terminating Mary’s parental rights to her son (referred to as Neal) was in his best interest.

State v. K.R.C., 2023AP2102, 10/30/24, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

In a “close” suppression appeal, COA confronts a fact pattern arising from the intersection between policing and school discipline, finds that a reasonable 12-year old would have felt free to walk away from interviews with law enforcement and school authorities on school grounds, and finds the repeated injection of inadmissible evidence at the court trial harmless.

State v. Kayden Young, 2021AP1596-CR, 10/29/24, District III (recommended for publication); case activity

In a case recommended for publication, the Court of Appeals reversed the circuit court’s order dismissing the charge against Kayden Young for failing to comply with the sex offender registration requirements.  Where the circuit court did not require Young to register as a sex offender when it placed him on probation, but required registration when it sentenced him after revocation of probation, “that latter order controls the defendant’s requirement to comply with sex offender registration.”  (¶ 22).

Dane County v. L.D.D., 2024AP1267, District IV, 10/24/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s order terminating L.D.D.’s parental rights after it entered default judgment when she did not appear at the hearing on grounds to terminate or the disposition hearing.  The Court also affirmed the circuit court’s order denying L.D.D.’s motion to vacate the default judgment based on new evidence.

State v. Goth, 2024AP519-CR, 10/10/24, District IV (not recommended for publication); case activity

Goth challenges his plea to an amended charge of third-degree sexual assault. The parties agree he made a prima facie showing that the circuit court erred at the plea by failing to ascertain his awareness of “the purpose element” of sexual contact. The COA concludes that the state failed to establish that despite the court’s failure, Goth  was aware of the purpose element when he entered his plea. (¶¶1-2).

State v. C.M., 2024AP1416-1418, District I, 10/15/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

The parent’s challenge to the court’s discretionary termination decision goes nowhere given the standard of review.