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.
OWI–Refusal
County of Fond du Lac v. Nancy C. Bush, 2012AP1486, District 2, 10/31/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Under the implied consent law, a motorist must, when properly requested to submit to a chemical test, answer “promptly,” State v. Neitzel, 95 Wis. 2d 191, 205, 289 N.W.2d 828 (1980), else failure to respond will be construed as refusal.
Hearsay – Prior Consistent Statement, § 908.01(4)(a)2;
State v. Daniel Buchanan, 2011AP830-CR, District 1, 10/30/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Hearsay – Prior Consistent Statement, § 908.01(4)(a)2
The prior-consistent statement rule allows substantive admissibility of an out-of-court statement if: “(1) the declarant testifies at trial and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement; (2) the statement is consistent with the declarant’s testimony; and (3) the statement is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive,”
Warrantless Entry – Curtilage – Attached Garage
State v. Michael C. Christofferson, 2012AP571-CR, District 3, 10/30/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
The officer didn’t develop probable cause (for OWI arrest; Christofferson was getting out of his car when the officer first saw him) until after illegal entry of the attached garage, therefore the ensuing arrest was unlawful.
¶10 Under the Fourth Amendment, police are prohibited from making a warrantless and nonconsensual entry into a suspect’s home absent probable cause and exigent circumstances.
McQuiggin v. Floyd Perkins, USSC No. 12-126, cert granted 10/29/12
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) contains a one-year statute of limitations for filing a habeas petition. In Holland v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. 2549, 2562 (2010), this Court affirmed that a habeas petitioner is entitled to equitable tolling of that one-year period “only if he shows: (1) that he has been pursuing his rights diligently, and (2) that some extraordinary circumstance stood in his way and prevented timely filing.”
Nicole Harris v. Sheryl Thompson, 7th Cir No. 12-1088, 10/18/12
seventh circuit decision (html) (90-page pdf download: here), granting habeas relief in 904 N.E.2d 1077 (Ill. App. 2009)
A significant decision in several respects – not least, attorney performance – that a summary post cannot hope to capture, save broad highlights. Executive summary: Harris was convicted of killing her 4-year-old son Jaquari, against a defense of accidental death (self-strangulation with an elastic band). The defense had potential,
The Plotkin Analysis: SPD 2013-2015 budget request
On September 17, state agency budget requests for the 2013-2015 biennium were submitted to the Department of Administration for review prior to the introduction of the budget bill by the Governor in February 2013. While not all agency proposals will be included in the Governor’s budget, the requests give an indication of agency priorities during the next legislative session.
Following is a quick summary of selected items from our budget request:
- Full-funding of pay progression for ASPD staff.
Reasonable Suspicion, Probable Cause – OWI
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
State v. Andrew Wheaton, 2012AP173-CR
Reasonable Suspicion – OWI
Presence of the following factors establish reasonable suspicion to stop Wheaton for impaired driving:
¶23 The State points to the following as factors that produced an objectively reasonable suspicion of impaired driving at the time of the stop: (1) Wheaton was driving at 3:05 a.m.,
Arrest – Fresh Pursuit
State v. Randall Lee Sugden, 2012AP408-CR, District 4, 10/15/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Arrest in Richland County by a Sauk County deputy sheriff was justified under the fresh pursuit doctrine, § 175.40(2). State v. Haynes, 2001 WI App 266, 248 Wis. 2d 724, 638 N.W.2d 82, discussed and applied:
¶12 Applying Haynes to the facts of this case,
Traffic Stop – “Dealer Imitation” Plate
State v. Jan P. Hogan, 2012AP966-CR, District 4, 10/25/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Reasonable suspicion supported stop of car displaying “dealer imitation” plate (i.e., failing to display permanent or temporary plate in violation of § 341.04(1)). State v. Griffin, 183 Wis. 2d 327, 333, 515 N.W.2d 535 (Ct. App. 1994) (OK to stop car with “license applied for”
Serial Litigation Bar – Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Robert J. Jacobson, 2011AP581, District 2/3, 10/24/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity; prior history: 2003AP2023-CR (direct appeal), 2005AP1928 (Knight petition)
Jacobson was convicted after jury trial on three counts of attempted homicide. He undertook an unsuccessful direct appeal, followed by a “Knight” habeas petition (the latter arguing that appellate counsel was ineffective in certain respects).
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.