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.
Appellate Procedure – Mootness Doctrine; Sentencing Review – Consideration of Pending Charge
State v. Thomas J. Hoffman, 2010AP1327-CR, District 2, 3/30/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Hoffman: Kathleen A. Lindgren; case activity
Hoffman’s challenge to the length of his sentence became moot once he had fully served it.
¶6 At the outset, the State contends that Hoffman’s appeal is moot; he has served his entire seven-month sentence and this court’s review on his motion for sentence modification will have no practical effect.
Court of Appeals Publication Orders, 3/11
court of appeals publication orders, 3/30/11
On Point posts from this list:
2011 WI App 28 State v. Derek J. Copeland
2011 WI App 30 State v. Rory A. Kuenzi
2011 WI App 31 Shirley Anderson v. Northwood School District
2011 WI App 34 State v. Jason L. Miller
2011 WI App 43 State v.
§ 951.02, Animal Cruelty, in rel. to Ch. 29 Hunting Restrictions
State v. Robby D. Kuenzi, 2011 WI App 30; for Rory Kuenzi: Thomas W. Johnson; for Robby Kuenzi: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Animal Cruelty, § 951.02
Cruel mistreatment of non-captive wild animals – in this case, deer intentionally rammed by snowmobiles, concededly cruel acts – may be prosecuted under § 951.02, whether or not the acts are specifically regulated by chapter 29 hunting restrictions.
IAC Claim – Lack of Prejudice
State v. Christopher Donnell Jones, 2010AP164-CR, District 1, 3/29/11
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Jones: Melinda A. Swartz, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; case activity
Counsel’s failure to impeach police officers with their reports, which omitted certain details they testified to, wasn’t prejudicial. Therefore, the postconviction court properly denied relief without holding a Machner hearing.
¶18 We disagree. The omission of these reports did not prejudice Jones’s case.
Equitable Estoppel: Can’t Bar Prosecution, as Matter of Law
State v. James M. Drown, 2011 WI App 53; for Drown: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
As a matter of law, equitable estoppel doesn’t bar prosecution of a crime. After pleading guilty to Shawano County charges related to an abduction and assault, Drown was charged in Oconto based on the same incident. The trial court granted a defense motion to dismiss on the ground of equitable estoppel,
State ex rel. Ozanne v. Fitzgerald, 2011AP613-LV, District 4
Yesterday, the DOJ moved to withdraw its petition for leave to appeal the TRO entered by the Dane County Circuit Court last week. The DOJ argues that the appeal is moot because Act 10 became effective the day after its publication by the Legislative Reference Bureau on March 25th. The court of appeals swiftly denied the motion, explaining: “it appears that we lack the authority to grant the withdrawal motion while our certification is pending and that the Attorney General should have addressed his motion to the Supreme Court.”
Light Posting Ahead
Posting will be unavoidably light to non-existent this week. Most likely the court of appeals will issue publication orders during that time. If you need up-to-date publication information, check here. For new releases, check here for the court of appeals, and here for the supreme court. Scotusblog and LII are excellent sources for United States Supreme Court releases.
Sorry for any inconvenience.
Andre Brown v. Rednour, 7th Cir No. 10-1116, 3/25/11
Habeas Review – Inadmissible Evidence – Harmless Error
Error in jury exposure, during deliberations, to inadmissible police report deemed harmless where the report contained merely cumulative information, the trial court gave a curative instruction, and the evidence against Brown was overwhelming.
The standard on direct appeal for measuring reversible error is the familiar Chapman test, whether the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
State ex rel. Ozanne v. Fitzgerald, 2011AP613-LV, District 4, 3/24/11
certification request; case activity
Budget Repair Bill TRO
This case presents several significant issues involving justiciability and the remedies that are available under Wisconsin’s Open Meetings Law, Wis. Stat. § 19.81 et seq. As we will explain below, we believe that resolution of these questions will require clarification of the interaction between the Open Meetings Law and a line of cases dealing with the separation of powers doctrine.
Reasonable Suspicion – Terry Stop
State v. Joseph R. Jones, 2010AP2326-CR, District 4, 3/24/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Jones: Rebecca J. Vahle; case activity
Reasonable suspicion to believe Jones had committed a (domestic violence-related) crime supported investigative stop.
¶10 Deputy Miller, who was dispatched to aid Curley, observed a woman standing alone on a deserted county road before the sun had risen. He was aware that she had informed the 911 dispatcher that she had been kicked out of a vehicle and he observed that she was scared and crying.
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.