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 – “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court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity; prior history: 2003AP2023-CR (direct appeal), 2005AP1928 (Knight petition)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).
Probation Search: PBT Administered by Police Officer
State v. Marilee F. Devries, 2012 WI App 119 (recommended for publication); case activity
Devries’ probation agent, after detecting alcohol on her breath during a visit at the probation office, had a law enforcement officer administer a preliminary breath test. One thing led to another and she was convicted of OWI. She challenges the PBT as a police, rather than probation, search because the probation officer wasn’t involved in the test,
Plea Bargains: Validity, Good-Faith Error in Maximum Penalty
State v. Ronald W. Lichty, 2012 WI App 129(recommended for publication); case activity
Lichty pleaded no contest pursuant to plea bargain which allowed, due to a good-faith mistake, the State to recommend a period of extended supervision that exceeded the permissible maximum by one year. The error was discerned prior to sentencing, where the State reduced its extended supervision recommendation by one year. (His plea was to two counts of the same offense,
William Thompkins, Jr. v. Pfister, 7th Cir No. 10-2467, 10/23/12
seventh circuit decision, denying habeas relief in 641 N.E.2d 371 (Ill. 1994) and 521 N.E.2d 38 (1988)
Habeas Review – 6th Amendment Attachment of Counsel – State Court Findings
The Seventh Circuit rejects, on habeas review of his Illinois conviciton, Thompkins’ challenge to admissibility of his statement. Thompkins made his statement after his arrest and, according to the state court, before his initial bond hearing.
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – “911 Hang-Up Call”
State v. Terry E. Nelson, 2012AP1418-CR, District 3, 10/23/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Reasonable suspicion supported stop of vehicle pulling out of driveway of house from which, shortly before, someone had called 911 but then hung up. United States v. Cohen, 481 F.3d 896 (6th Cir. 2007) (“the virtually complete lack of information conveyed by the silent 911 hang-up call and the total absence of corroborating evidence indicating that criminal activity was afoot requires us to give the 911 hang-up call little weight in evaluating the totality of the circumstances”),
State v. Matthew A. Lonkoski, No. 2010AP2809-CR, WSC review granted 10/16/12
on review of unpublished decision; case activity
Issue (composed by On Point)
Whether, after asserting his right to counsel, Lonkonski initiated further communication with the police so as to allow admissibility of his ensuing statement, Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 483-85 (1981).
There may be a threshold dispute as to whether Lonkoski was in custody at the time he asserted his right to counsel,
State v. Matthew R. Steffes, 2012 WI App 47, WSC review granted 10/16/12
on review of published decision; case activity
Issues (composed by On Point):
1. Whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain conviction for conspiracy-theft by fraud, in that: no conspirator expressly made a false representation; and in any event, Steffes joined the conspiracy after it had already been set in motion.
2. Whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain conviction for a felony, in that the evidence failed to establish theft of at least $2,500.
TPR – Withdrawal of Admission
Nicole P. v. Michael P., 2012AP780, District 3, 10/16/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Father’s motion to withdraw admission to grounds (based on asserted lack of understanding that: termination of parental rights required an unfitness determination; sole focus of dispositional hearing would be child’s best interests, with no concern for parent’s own interests; disposition could result in permanent extinction of all his parental rights),
Reasonable Suspicion – Domestic Violence – Anonymous Tip
City of Sheboygan v. Herbert Binkowsky, 2012AP974, District 2, 10/17/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
An anonymous call to the police, reporting the commission of domestic violence by a suspect who drove away in a red Cadillac with an identified plate number, was sufficiently corroborated to support a stop of a car matching the description.
¶13 “[I]f a tip contains strong indicia of an informant’s basis of knowledge,
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.