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
COA affirms denial of suppression motion, but reminds state of basic briefing rules
State v. Mitchell D. Butschle, 2023AP2120-CR, 5/8/24, District II (one-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
On appeal from a conviction for operating with a detectable controlled substance, the court rejects Butschle’s claims that police lacked probable cause to arrest. The court affirms because “there were enough indicators of impairment to satisfy probable cause to arrest, including (1) “a strong odor of alcohol,” (2) “Butschle’s eyes were bloodshot and glassy,” (3) “the stop occurred just after 2:00 a.m., which is bar time,” and (4) “Butschle failed the HGN test and showed balance indicators on the other two [FSTs].” Op., ¶¶10-11.
A trio of defense wins: Circuit court properly exercised discretion in ruling on motions for DPA in juvenile cases
State v. J.A.N., 2023AP1108, 5/14/24, District I (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
State v. Z.D.S., 2023AP1109, 5/14/24, District I (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
State v. S.R., 2023AP1110, 5/14/24, District I (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a series of appeals seemingly aimed at the discretionary decisions of an individual circuit court judge, COA affirms the circuit court’s decision to dismiss and refer these juvenile prosecutions for a DPA under a well-settled standard of review.
COA affirms orders denying return of property petition and imposing fine
State v. Andre L. Jones, 2023AP1535-CR, 2023AP1536-CR, 2023AP1537-CR and 2023AP1538-CR, 5/16/24, District IV(not recommended for publication); case activity
In a rare appeal of an order denying a motion for return of property, COA rejects a novel statutory construction argument by adhering to what it views as binding precedent.
SCOW DIGs Ch. 51 involuntary med appeal
Winnebago County v. D.E.W., 2024 WI 21 (per curiam), 5/14/24, review of an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity
Although many practitioners may have hoped that this case would resolve recurrent issues in appeals of involuntary medication orders, those issues will have to be resolved another day given SCOW’s order dismissing the petition as improvidently granted.
Circuit court properly granted summary judgment based on failure to respond to requests for admission and trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to respond
Kenosha County DC&FS v. A.G.O., 2023AP1305, 1307 & 1308, 5/8/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In yet another TPR case involving allegations of ineffective assistance, COA affirms based on hard-to-overcome legal standards.
DOC employees who miscalculated up to 1,500 sentences are denied qualified immunity by Seventh Circuit
John Sabo v. Megan Erickson, No. 21-3332, 4/30/24
In an interesting § 1983 appeal, Sabo reveals a disturbing trend of miscalculated sentences by the Wisconsin DOC.
Seventh Circuit holds that habeas petitioner is not entitled to relief due to conflict of interest
Keith C. Henyard v. Cheryl Eplett, No. 22-3086, 4/26/24
Although Henyard argues that his conviction must be reversed because the lawyer who represented him was also the judicial official who bound him over for trial, the Seventh Circuit denies relief and holds that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals did not erroneously apply governing federal law.
COA dismisses “recency argument” and affirms Ch. 51 commitment
Winnebago County v. A.F.H., 2023AP1798, 5/1/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In this chapter 51 appeal from an order for involuntary commitment and treatment, and an order denying postdisposition relief, the court of appeals affirms, concluding that even without the inadmissible hearsay, sufficient evidence existed supporting the underlying orders.
Juvenile wins new hearing on whether stay of sex offender registration should be lifted; loses on judicial bias claim
State v. L.R.J., 2023AP1902, 5/8/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
“Lincoln” succeeds on his claim related to sex offender registration due to the State’s concession but fails to rebut the presumption that the court acted impartially when revoking a stayed Serious Juvenile Offender (SJO) order.
Seventh Circuit cases for April
April was a busy month; we’ve tried to pull out those cases most relevant to our readers:
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.