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.
Important posts
Ahead in SCOW
Sign up
Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop – Crossing Fog Line
State v. Jordan T. Griffith, 2011AP2226-CR, District 2, 2/15/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Griffith: Walter Arthur Piel, Jr.; case activity ¶5 In order for an investigatory stop to be justified by reasonable suspicion, the officer must have a “‘particularized and objective basis’ for suspecting the person stopped of criminal activity.” State v. […]
Probation – Length of Term, Authority to Reduce
State v. Carl L. Dowdy, 2012 WI 12, affirming 2010 WI App 58; for Dowdy: Bryan J. Cahill; Amicus: Dustin Haskell (SPD), Robert Henak (WACDL); case activity ¶4 We conclude that Wis. Stat. § 973.09(3)(a) does not grant a circuit court authority to reduce the length of probation. Rather, the plain language of § 973.09(3)(a) grants a circuit court authority only […]
TPR – Grounds, Sufficiency of Evidence; TPR – Termination Phase, Exercise of Discretion
State v. Marquis O., 2011AP2642, District 1, 2/14/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Marquis O.: Carl W. Chessir; case activity Grounds for terminating parental rights upheld, against argument that Bureau of Child Welfare didn’t make reasonable effort to provide services for Marquis O. to meet conditions for child’s return to him. […]
Keith Bland, Jr. v. Hardy, 7th Cir No. 10-1566, 2/13/12
seventh circuit decision Habeas – Knowing Use of False Testimony (“Napue”) Due process prohibits knowing prosecutorial use of false testimony, Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264, 269 (1959). However, the prosecutor’s exploitation of Bland’s incorrect testimony on a potentially important point (the date his gun was confiscated) doesn’t support habeas relief on a Napue-type theory. Napue and Giglio hold […]
State v. Gerald D. Taylor, 2011AP1030-CR, District 3/4, 2/9/12, review granted
court of appeals certification; for Taylor: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; review granted, 3/15/12 Guilty Pleas – Plea Colloquy Certified Issue: Whether a plea colloquy’s understating the potential penalty is subject to harmless error analysis, such that if the subsequently-imposed sentence doesn’t exceed the misadvised maximum, plea-withdrawal isn’t supported. The details: Taylor was charged as a repeater […]
Habeas – Procedural Bar, Guilty Plea (IAC Claim)
Marilyn Mulero v. Thompson, 7th Cir No. 10-3875, 2/7/12 seventh circuit decision Habeas – Procedural Bar Muleros’ failure to present various claims “through one complete round of state court review” operates as procedural default; citing, Smith v. McKee, 598 F.3d 374, 382 (7th Cir. 2010). … While Mulero did present numerous other claims of ineffective […]
Issue Preclusion – OWI Enhancer; Foreign Conviction; Collateral Attack
State v. Michael A. Imbruglia, 2011AP1373-CR, District 2, 2/8/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Imbruglia: Rick Ramirez; case activity In circuit court, Imbruglia successfully challenged use of a Colorado conviction as an OWI enhancer (on the ground that statute isn’t “substantially similar” to Wisconsin’s). However, after another OWI arrest the very next day, […]
Violation of TRO, § 813.125
State v. James M. Johnson, 2011AP2374-CR, District 2, 2/8/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); pro se; case activity Evidence – Johnson left voicemail message on complainant’s work phone – held sufficient to sustain conviction for violating temporary restraining order. ¶8 Regarding the nature of the voice mail message and its violation of the […]
Interrogation – Scrupulously Honoring Right to Silence
State v. Zachary Ryan Wiegand, 2011AP939-CR, District 3, 2/7/12 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Wiegand: Brian C. Findley; case activity Despite initially waiving his Miranda rights, Wiegand later unequivocally asserted his right to silence (“I don’t want to say anything more”); nonetheless, the interrogating officer did not scrupulously honor this invocation, and […]
TPR – Constitutionality, § 48.415(6)
Chippewa County Dept. of Human Services v. James A., 2011AP2613, District 3, 2/7/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for James A.: Susan E. Alesia, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity ¶18 James does not allege Wis. Stat. § 48.415(6) implicates a First Amendment right. Therefore, the threshold question is whether James’ conduct plainly falls within the statute’s proscriptions. If […]
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.