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.
Court of appeals reverses conviction for hit and run involving death due to trial counsel’s ineffective assistance
State v. Marker Alan Sperber, 2013AP358-CR, District 3, 10/15/13 (not recommended for publication); case activity
This appeal turns on Wis JI-Criminal 2670, which explains the 5 elements of the crime the Sperber was charged with–a hit and run causing death to the victim. The 2nd element requires that the defendant know that his vehicle was involved in an accident involving a person. The problem here was that Sperber was driving in the dark on wet roads flanked by blackened snowbanks.
State’s handling of photo array evidence did not violate due process or discovery statute
State v. Raynard Rashawn Jackson, 2012AP1854, 2012AP1861, and 2012AP1862, District 1, 10/15/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity: 2012AP1854; 2012AP1861; 2012AP1862
Jackson was alleged to have been involved in a shooting, and as part of their investigation the police constructed a photo array to show to three eyewitnesses, all of whom identified Jackson. (¶¶2, 10-11). The array consisted of photos of Jackson and five other persons.
Defendant was competent to proceed despite “clouded judgment” that affected his ability to decide whether to accept plea agreement
State v. Maurice C. Hall, 2013AP209-CR, District 1, 10/15/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
A competency evaluation found Hall competent to proceed, though his mental health history caused Deborah Collins, the examiner, to “urge court officers to remain sensitive in the event of any significant changes in his overall mental status as such a factor may signal decline in his competency and warrant his reexamination.”
OWI — probable cause to arrest despite lack of field sobriety tests
State v. Lewis Allen Stokes, 2012AP2621-CR, District 1, 10/15/13; court of appeals opinion (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Probable cause to arrest for OWI was established based on: police observations of Stokes speeding and weaving in and out of traffic without signaling at 11:00 p.m.; Stokes’s slurred speech and the strong odor of alcohol on his breath; and Stokes’s argumentative and combative attitude toward the police. (¶¶4-5, 10).
Traffic stops — reasonable basis to prolong traffic stop to conduct field sobriety tests
State v. Richard H. Hogenson, 2013AP389-CR, District 3, 10/15/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Though it is “a very close case” (¶14), the court of appeals holds an officer had reasonable suspicion to extend a traffic stop based on a burned-out headlamp and conduct field sobriety tests:
¶15 In this case, at the moment [Officer] Jenatscheck requested that Hogenson participate in field sobriety tests,
Court properly exercised discretion in denying stay of juvenile sex offender registration
State v. Albert A., 2013AP549, District 3, 10/15/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Albert sought to stay juvenile sex offender registration under State v. Cesar G., 2004 WI 61, ¶40, 272 Wis. 2d 22, 682 N.W.2d 1, but the circuit court denied the request. The court discounted a psychosexual evaluator’s opinion that Albert was low risk to reoffend because the judge believed the evaluator’s opinion reflected an actuarial assessment of group,
What’s Happening in the Supreme Court of Wisconsin?
Petitions for Review. SCOW plans to hold a petitions conference on Monday–a good thing since as of September 30th there were a whopping 331 petitions for review pending. One was filed as far back as 2009 (2009AP1955), 10 were filed in consolidated cases back in 2010 (2009AP2266 et al.) and 8 were filed in 2012. The rest landed in the clerk’s office during 2013. Of those 331 petitions for review,
Circuit court properly exercised discretion in denying “new factor” time cut request
State v. David J. Lawrence, 2013AP796, District 4, 10/10/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court knew of Lawrence’s mental health diagnoses at sentencing, but after sentencing Lawrence was hospitalized after a psychological breakdown. (¶¶3-4). He requested sentence modification, arguing the court was not aware of all his diagnoses or his medication regimen. (¶5). Assuming that information was a “new factor,” the circuit court gave a reasoned explanation for why it declined to modify the sentence,
Warrantless entry into home to arrest for OWI was not justified by exigent circumstances
State v. Jeffrey G. Vanden Huevel, 2013AP1107-CR, District 3, 10/8/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
After rolling his car over early one morning Vanden Huevel left the scene of the accident and went back to his cabin. (¶¶1-7). A sheriff’s deputy named Kelley located the cabin and started knocking on a sliding patio door. (¶¶8-9). Kelley could see someone inside and told the person to open the door,
State v. Charles Edward Hennings, 2012AP2229-CR, District 1/4, 10/3/13
Court of Appeals certification; case activity
When deciding a defendant’s motion for postconviction DNA testing under Wis. Stat. § 974.07, must the circuit court presume that the DNA testing results will be exculpatory and then assess whether such presumed exculpatory results would lead to a reasonable probability that he would not have been prosecuted or convicted?
The issue here turns on the meaning of § 974.07(7)(a)2.
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.