On Point

State v. Lemar C. Newell, Jr., 2024AP1549-CR, 10/27/26, District I (recommended for publication); case activity

In a significant decision, COA finds that the State breached the plea agreement when it asked for a charge to be read-in, instead of dismissed outright, at sentencing.

We admit to having fallen behind on the publication orders from COA, so here they are without further ado:

Village of Whitefish Bay v. Ross Bolingbroke, 2025AP2035-36, 10/27/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity

Although Bolingbroke claims he was unable to attend court due to a medical issue, COA upholds the circuit court’s discretionary decision under these facts.

State of Wisconsin v. Gabriela Dominguez, 2025AP2666-CR, 10/21/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

Relying on existing precedent, COA concludes a smell of marijuana from a car in which Dominguez was a passenger established probable cause to arrest.

State v. Shane M. Helmbrecht, 2024AP1850, petition for review of a per curiam opinion of the court of appeals, granted 10/14/26; case activity

SCOW will decide whether it is appropriate to order postdisposition competency evaluations in cases on appeal from determinations on competence to stand trial.

State v. Roosevelt L. Spencer, 2025AP1256, 10/20/26, District III (not recommended for publication); case activity

The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress based on issue preclusion where his motion was granted in a prior case, which was dismissed without prejudice, because the State’s only witness did not appear at the evidentiary hearing.  The COA found the criteria for issue preclusion were established – that the matter was actually litigated previously and that applying issue preclusion comported with principles of fundamental fairness.

Chippewa County v. N.M.E., 2026AP545, 10/13/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA reversed the circuit court’s order granting Chippewa County’s petition for protective placement because the evidence was insufficient to show that “Nora’s” cognitive decline presented a substantial risk of serious and foreseeable harm to her and because protective placement was not the least restrictive environment consistent with her needs.

Rock County Human Services Department v. T.S., 2026AP1628-29, 10/15/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

Although T.S. presents a medley of interesting legal challenges, COA beats backs those arguments and affirms.

State v. K.T.R., 2026AP929, 10/14/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

COA holds that the jury’s “impossibility” finding with respect to the continuing CHIPS allegation does not “carry over” to the failure to assume ground and affirms an order terminating parental rights.

Milwaukee County Department on Aging v. J.J., 2024AP1850, petition for review of a published court of appeals decision, granted 10/14/26; case activity

SCOW will decide whether the circuit court loses competency to continue protective placement when the County does not comply with the deadline to file a petition and report for annual review.