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.
OWI – Enhancer – Collateral Attack
State v. George McGee, 2010AP3040-CR, District 3, 4/26/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for McGee: Steven G. Richards; case activity
McGee’s collateral attack on a prior OWI conviction used to enhance his present sentence is necessarily limited to denial of the constitutional right to counsel, ¶5. Although McGee represented himself in the challenged prior, he failed to show that his waiver of counsel was invalid.
No specific diagnosis, but evidence sufficient to support recommitment and involuntary medication
Brown County v. Quinn M., 2010AP3162, District 3, 4/26/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Quinn M.: Chandra N. Harvey, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Evidence held sufficient to support extension of ch. 51 commitment upheld. 1. Mental illness. Expert testified that she was certain Quinn had a mental illness, though given his history of drug and alcohol use she could not provide a specific diagnosis with certainty.
Binding Authority: Overruled Court of Appeals Decision
Adam Martine v. Quentin J. Williams, 2011 WI App 68 (recommended for publication); case activity
¶13 Prior to last year, this court applied a general rule regarding court of appeals’ cases reversed by the supreme court that “holdings not specifically reversed on appeal retain precedential value.” Blum v. 1st Auto & Cas. Ins. Co., 2010 WI 78, ¶44, 326 Wis. 2d 729, 786 N.W.2d 78 (citation omitted).
Court of Appeals Publication Orders, 4/11
court of appeals publication orders, 4/20/11
On Point posts from this list:
2011 WI App 52 State v. Winston B. Eison
2011 WI App 53 State v. James M. Drown
Judulang v. Holder, USSC No. 10-694, cert granted 4/19/11
Decision below (9th Cir, unpublished)
For more than 25 years, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that a legal permanent resident (LPR) who is deportable due to a criminal conviction could seek a discretionary waiver of removal under Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §1182(c), provided that the conviction also would have constituted a waivable basis for exclusion.
Habeas – IAC – NGI Defense
Albert Price v. Thurmer, 7th Cir No. 09-3851, 4/18/11
7th circuit court of appeals decision, on remand after prior appeal, 514 F.3d 729, denying relief on review of unpublished decision of Wis COA
Habeas – IAC – NGI Defense
Trial counsel seemingly mishandled the court-appointed NGI expert, in failing to cure the latter’s apparent misapprehension that he couldn’t rely on eyewitness reports of Price’s behavior absent determination of their credibility by the trial judge.
Plea Bargain – Breach by Defendant
State v. Christian R. Colon, 2010AP839-CR, District 1, 4/19/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Colon: Amelia L. Bizzaro; case activity
Colon’s refusal to testify against codefendant Rivera constituted a substantial and material breach of his plea bargain, such that the State was freed from restrictions on its allocution, ¶¶9-16.
The sheriff placed Colon in a cell with Rivera the night before Colon was to testify,
TPR
State v. Gabriel S., 2010AP2876, District 1, 4/19/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Gabriel S.: Jane S. Earle; case activity
Decision to terminate parental rights upheld as proper exercise of discretion, against argument (as to grounds) that Gabriel S. wasn’t to blame for abuse that caused child to be removed from home under CHIPS order; and (as to disposition) that in its best-interests analysis,
Habeas – Evidentiary Hearing – Federal Review Limited to State Court Record
Cullen v. Scott Lynn Pinholster, USSC No. 09-1088, 4/4/11
We first consider the scope of the record for a §2254(d)(1) inquiry. The State argues that review is limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits. Pinholster contends that evidence presented to the federal habeas court may also be considered. We agree with the State.
…
We now hold that review under §2254(d)(1) is limited to the record that was before the state court that adjudicated the claim on the merits.
SVP: Pre-Commitment Return to DOC Custody
State v. Carl Cornelius Gilbert, Jr. / State v. Price T. Hunt, 2011 WI App 61, affirmed 2012 WI 72 (recommended for publication); for Gilbert: William J. Tyroler, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; for Hunt: Eric James Van Schyndle, Leah Stoecker, Allison E. Cimpl-Wiemer; case activity (Gilbert), case activity (Hunt); affirmed, 2012 WI 72
SVP – Pre-Commitment Return to DOC Custody
¶1 …
Important Posts
Ahead in SCOW
Sign up
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.