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
HUGE Defense Win: 7th Circuit holds that SCOW’s decision is not entitled to AEDPA deference, calls Wisconsin’s treatment of petitioner a “travesty of justice” and grants writ
Robert J. Pope v. Je’Leslie Taylor, No. 23-2894, 5/6/24, affirming Pope v. Kemper, 21-CV-0346 (E.D. Wis. 9/1/23)
In a refreshing defense win that cuts through the procedural weeds and directly attacks the unjust nature of Pope’s treatment by Wisconsin’s appellate courts, the Seventh Circuit wastes no time in affirming the district court’s grant of the writ of habeas corpus.
COA issues published decision interpreting 971.365(1)(b) and rejects arguments for plea withdrawal
State v. Cordiaral F. West, 2022AP2196, 5/1/24, District II (recommended for publication); case activity
COA interprets a statute allowing aggregation of separate drug offenses into a single charge and holds that West is not entitled to plea withdrawal.
COA holds that evidence was sufficient for extension of underlying 2015 commitment order
Racine County v. P.Z., 2024AP146-FT, 5/1/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
In a relatively straightforward appeal of a recommitment order, COA rejects P.Z.’s sufficiency challenges and affirms.
Defense Win! COA reverses $40,000 restitution order as sanction for state’s abandonment of appeal
State v. Paul R. Noble, 2023AP1444-CR, 4/24/24, District II (one-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
While Noble’s arguments on appeal appear to have substantial merit, the court of appeals declines to address the merits because the state abandoned the appeal and thereby conceded that “Noble’s arguments are correct.”
Defense Win! Circuit court’s failure to “personally ascertain” factual basis for pleas entitles defendant to Bangert hearing
State v. Megan E. Zeien, 2023AP1787-CR, 4/24/24, District II (one-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
If you’ve ever wondered whether you have a Bangert claim concerning a circuit court’s failure to “ascertain personally whether a factual basis exists to support [your client’s] plea,” this unpublished but citable decision is worth a read. Unfortunately, the decision is a bit unclear about how exactly the state may seek to establish that Zeien’s pleas were knowing, intelligent, and voluntary at an evidentiary hearing. See Op., ¶¶19, 22.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel asks: “Facing mostly white juries, are Milwaukee County defendants of color truly judged by their peers?”
We thought our readers might be interested in this in-depth report from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel regarding the issue of obtaining diverse juries in Milwaukee County, with quotes from SPD’s Meera Al-Hanaey as well as Judges Danielle Shelton and Jonathan Richards.
Eastern District grants petition for writ of habeas corpus in case alleging inaccurate information at sentencing
Jared L. Spencer v. Michael Meisner, 21-cv-0326 (E.D. Wis. 4/26/24).
In an intriguing habeas win, the district court swats away the usual arguments about “reliance” and “harmlessness” in order to find that Spencer’s constitutional right to be sentenced on the basis of accurate information was violated.
In which SCOW reminds us NOT to write true-crime books about our clients
OLR v. Roger G. Merry, 2022AP35-D, 4/24/24, per curiam decision of the Wisconsin Supreme Court (in its disciplinary capacity).
Although the “true crime” genre remains as big as ever, SCOW reminds lawyers to exercise caution in this area when dealing with one’s own case.
In big defense win, COA holds that 46 month delay was a violation of defendant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial
State v. Luis A. Ramirez, 2022AP959-CR, 4/25/24, District IV (recommended for publication); petition for review granted 10/7/24, reversed 6/27/25 case activity
In a must-read defense win, COA holds that the State’s “cavalier disregard” for Ramirez’s speedy trial rights entitle him to dismissal of the underlying complaint.
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.