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.
Plea withdrawal – information about collateral consequences; postconviction motion – failure to allege sufficient material facts
State v. Ryan L. Kohlhoff, 2012AP1144-CR, 2/14/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Plea withdrawal – information about collateral consequences of plea
Plea colloquy telling Kohlhoff that, if he pled no contest to a misdemeanor crime involving domestic violence, he would “lose [his] right to carry a firearm under federal law” accurately informed Kohlhoff of the collateral consequences of his plea,
OWI — probable cause to arrest
State v. Amanda Kratochwill, 2012AP2076-CR, District 4, 2/14/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Police had probable cause to arrest Kratochwill for OWI where:
- Car was stopped for speeding (¶2);
- Upon approaching the car the officer noted a strong smell of intoxicants and an open beer in the front passenger cup holder (¶2);
- When told she was speeding,
Traffic stop – failure to stop for flashing red light
State v. Heather Tollefson, 2012AP1641-CR, District 4, 2/14/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
A police officer had probable cause to stop Tollefson for failing to fully stop for a flashing red traffic light. The officer saw a red vehicle approach an intersection with flashing red lights in each direction. (¶3). A gray vehicle followed behind the red vehicle. (¶3). The red vehicle stopped before going through the intersection;
Traffic stop — probable cause to believe traffic law had been violated
City of Oshkosh v. Eric Carley, 2012AP2043, District 2, 2/13/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Police officer had probable cause to stop Carley after he saw Carley drive in the left lane to go around a turning vehicle, but did so within several car lengths of oncoming traffic before moving back into the right lane. (¶2). The officer’s observations gave him probable cause to stop Carley because he had reason to believe Carley had violated Wis.
Arrest and warrantless search of a home – no probable cause, exigent circumstances, community caretaker exception, or consent.
State v. Daniel Cervantes, 2011AP1858-CR, District 1, 2/12/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
The police lacked probable cause to arrest Cervantes when he opened the door of his apartment (¶¶10-16); there were neither exigent circumstances nor community caretaker grounds for the police to enter Cervantes’s apartment following his arrest to do a protective sweep (¶¶14-23); and his subsequent “consent” to search the apartment was not sufficiently attenuated from the illegal arrest and entries (¶¶24-30).
Protective placement – sufficiency of evidence
Wood County v. Zebulon K., 2011AP2387, and Wood County v. Forest K., 2011AP2394, District 4, 2/7/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity: Zebulon K.; Forest K.
The evidence was not sufficient to prove that Zebulon and Forest need to be protectively placed. Though Zebulon and Forest are developmentally disabled, the evidence does not establish they are “so totally incapable of providing for [their] own care and custody as to create a substantial risk of serious harm to [themselves] or others” under Wis.
Truancy — jurisdiction of court; judicial bias
City of Appleton v. Kylie M. Johnson, 2012AP1922, District 3, 2/12/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Jurisdiction of court – defects in truancy citation
Defects in an habitual truancy citation did not prevent court from obtaining personal jurisdiction over Johnson before it entered default judgment. She did not appear at the first hearing on the citation, so the court entered a default judgment against her;
TPR – opinion testimony by case manager
State v. Gloria C., 2012AP1693 and 2012AP1694, District 1, 2/5/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the opinion testimony of the parent’s ongoing case manager, who said that based on the parent’s conduct in the preceding two years, she would not be able to meet the conditions necessary for the return of her children within nine months.
Ineffective assistance of counsel; “new factor” based sentence modification
State v. Stephen Lehman, 2011AP2821-CR, District I (not recommended for publication). Case activity.
Lehman pled guilty to 2 counts of burglary of a dwelling. The trial court sentenced him to 5 years of initial confinement and 3 years of extended supervision for each count. The court ran the sentences consecutively, ordered Lehman to pay $1,700 in restitution, and declared him ineligible for the Challenge Incarceration and Earned Release programs.
Indiana ban on sex offenders using social networking and social media sites violates First Amendment
Doe v. Prosecutor, Marion County, Indiana, Case No. 12-2512, 1/23/13; Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision
A recent Indiana statute prohibits most registered sex offenders from using social networking websites, instant messaging services, and chat programs. John Doe, on behalf of a class of similarly situated sex offenders, challenges this law on First Amendment grounds. We reverse the district court and hold that the law as drafted is unconstitutional. Though content neutral,
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.