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.
Traffic stop – reasonable suspicion; good-faith mistake of fact
State v. Donald D. Laufer, 2012AP915, District 2, 4/3/13; court of appeals decision (recommended for publication); case activity
The officer’s erroneous reading of Laufer’s license plate, which caused the officer to wrongly believe that the plate might not be registered to the vehicle, nonetheless supported stop of the car under the good-faith rule, adopting the reasoning of State v. Reierson, No. 2010AP596, unpublished slip op.
Discretion of trial court — evidentiary decisions; mistrial motions
State v. Desmond Dejuan Laster, 2012AP1739-CR, District 1, 4/2/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
The trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in making two evidentiary rulings or in denying Laster’s motion for a mistrial.
On the first evidentiary ruling, the court of appeals holds the trial court properly exercised its discretion in allowing the prosecutor to ask Hunt, a defense witness,
Restitution for damage to stolen van that is later used to commit robberies
State v. Devante J. Lumpkins, 2012AP1670-CR, District 1, 4/2/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Lumpkins is liable for restitution for damage to a stolen van he and two co-defendants (“The Jack Boys”) used to commit two armed robberies, even though Lumpkins was not charged with or convicted of the theft of the van. Restitution requires that there be a “direct victim” of the crime and a causal connection between the defendant’s conduct and the claimed damages (¶7),
Wisconsin Supreme Court: New fact-finding hearing before a jury is the proper remedy for erroneous grant of default judgment due to parent’s tardy appearance at second day of trial
Dane County DHS v. Mable K., 2013 WI 28, reversing court of appeals summary order; case activity
¶3 We conclude, and the circuit court has acknowledged, that it erroneously exercised its discretion when it entered a default judgment finding that grounds existed to terminate Mable K.’s parental rights after barring her attorney from offering additional evidence. It also erred when it granted the default judgment before taking evidence sufficient to establish the grounds alleged in the amended petitions.
Privileges — Confidential informant, § 905.10(3)(b) — sufficiency of information to trigger in camera review
State v. Jessica A. Nellessen, 2013 WI App 46, petition for review granted 10/15/13; case activity
Under the two-step procedure for determining whether a confidential informant’s identity should be disclosed, the court must first determine whether there is reason to believe that the informant may be able to give testimony “necessary to a fair determination of the issue of guilt or innocence.” If there is reason to so believe,
OWI — conviction for “first” offense must be vacated where defendant has prior OWIs despite delay in moving to vacate conviction and even though priors were from another state
Clark County v. Rex A. Potts, 2012AP2001, District 4, 3/28/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Potts’s 1996 conviction for OWI in violation of a county ordinance is void and must be vacated because defendant had prior convictions for operating while intoxicated—even though Potts did not move to vacate the judgment until 2012 and even though the prior convictions were from Massachusetts.
The circuit court rejected Potts’s motion for relief from the 1996 judgment because of his delay in bringing the motion,
Ineffective assistance of counsel — failure to present evidence, ineffective cross examination. Privileges — Confidential informant, § 905.10(3)(b); disclosure of informant
State v. Kendrick L. Lee, 2011AP2126-CR, District 4, 3/28/12; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Ineffective assistance of counsel — failure to present evidence, ineffective cross examination
In a necessarily fact-intensive discussion that defies quick summary here, the court of appeals concludes Lee’s trial attorney was not ineffective for failing to present two categories of additional evidence or in her cross examination of one of the state’s witnesses.
Guilty plea — factual basis; value of stolen property; breach of the plea agreement
State v. Lisa A. Brabazon, 2012AP1171-CR, District 4, 3/28/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Guilty plea — factual basis; value of stolen property
The victim’s statements as to the value of the stolen property (which were set forth in the complaint) provided a sufficient factual basis for concluding that the value exceeded the $5,000 threshold for felony theft:
¶19 ….
Self-incrimination — waiver of right to exclude immunized testimony and evidence; no need for personal colloquy with defendant; ineffective assistance of counsel
State v. Mark J. Libecki, 2013 WI App 49; case activity
Self-incrimination — waiver of right to exclude immunized testimony and evidence; no need for personal colloquy
In this case the court of appeals holds that when a defendant waives the right to exclude at trial immunized testimony or evidence derived from that testimony, the circuit court need not engage in a personal colloquy with the defendant on the record,
Probation – increase in length of term based on crime being an act of domestic abuse; notice of potential increase; factual basis for finding the act constituted domestic abuse
State v. John R. Edwards, 2013 WI App 51; case activity
The longer period of probation applicable to a misdemeanor act of domestic abuse under Wis. Stat. § 973.09(2)(a)1.b. may be ordered even though the charging documents did not allege the crime was an act of domestic abuse.
Edwards was charged with substantial battery, strangulation and suffocation, and disorderly conduct based on an incident with his live-in girlfriend.
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.