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.

Repeated child sexual assault, § 948.025: instruction on first degree child sexual assault as lesser-included; other acts evidence; date of offense; ineffective assistance of counsel

State v. Robert T. Warriner, 2012AP244-CR, District 2/1, 7/2/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity Instruction on first degree child sexual assault as lesser-included of repeated child sexual assault At trial the child testified that Warriner sexually assaulted her on only two occasions, so the trial court agreed, over Warriner’s objections, […]

Reference to defendant’s right against self-incrimination; newly discovered evidence — recantation

State v. Haven Pettigrew, 2012AP1860-CR, District 2/1, 7/2/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity Reference to right against self-incrimination Defense counsel revealed her theory of defense for the first time in her opening statement. During direct examination of the lead detective if that was the first time he had heard that […]

Doyle Randall Paroline v. United States, USSC No. 12-8561, cert granted 6/27/13

Question presented: What, if any, causal relationship or nexus between the defendant’s conduct and the victim’s harm or damages must the government or the victim establish in order to recover restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 2259? Lower court opinion: In re: Amy Unknown: United States v. Paroline, 701 F.3d 749 (5th Cir. 2012) Docket Scotusblog […]

Randy White, Warden, v. Robert Keith Woodall, USSC No. 12-704, cert granted 6/27/13

Questions presented: 1. Whether the Sixth Circuit violated 28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(1) by granting habeas relief on the trial court’s failure to provide a no adverse inference instruction even though this Court has not “clearly established” that such an instruction is required in a capital penalty phase when a non-testifying defendant has pled guilty to the crimes […]

McCullen v. Coakley, USSC No. 12-1168, cert granted 6/24/13

Questions presented: 1.     Massachusetts has a law that makes it a crime for speakers other than clinic employees or agents acting within the scope of employment to “enter or remain on a public way or sidewalk” within 35 feet of an entrance, exit, or driveway of  “a reproductive health care facility.” Did the First Circuit err […]

Blood draw at jail by EMT was reasonable

State v. Constance Ilene Osborne, 2012AP2540-CR, District 4, 6/27/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity The results of a blood draw done by an EMT at the jail after Osborne was arrested for OWI were admissible because the method and manner of the blood draw were reasonable and the EMT was […]

A reminder about preserving arguments

State v. Brian Kiale Little, 2012AP2162, District 4, 6/27/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity A year after Little pled no contest to carrying a concealed weapon he filed a motion for return of the gun and ammunition involved in the offense. The circuit court denied the motion because § 968.20(1m)(b) prohibits […]

“Bullshit” newly-discovered evidence and self-representation on 974.06 motions

State v. Joseph Jordan, 2011AP1249, District 1, 6/25/13; case activity; (not recommended for publication). What a challenging case.  A jury convicted Jordan of first-degree reckless homicide and other crimes.  He lost his direct appeal and then filed a pro se §974.06 motion requesting various forms of relief, including a new trial based on: (a) newly-discovered evidence, and (b) ineffective assistance of counsel. […]

SCOTUS: ICWA doesn’t apply to Indian father who abandons child prior to birth

Adoptive Couple v. Baby Birl, USSC No. 12-399, reversing and remanding 298 S.C. 625, 731 S.E.2d 550 (2012). SCOTUSblog coverage here. TPR lawyers, this one is for you. The dissent says the casual reader of the majority opinion could be forgiven for thinking that Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 points to only one sensible […]

U.S. Supreme Court: Investment recommendation is not “obtainable property” for purposes of Hobbs Act prosecution

Giridhar C. Sekhar v. United States, USSC No. 12-357, 6/26/13 United States Supreme Court decision, reversing U.S. v. Sekhar, 683 F.3d 436 (2nd Cir. 2012) Attempting to compel a person to recommend that his employer approve an investment does not constitute “the obtaining of property from another” for purposes of a prosecution under the Hobbs Act, […]

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.