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
State v. Edwin Clarence West, No. 2009AP1579, review granted 1/11/11
decision below: unpublished; for West: Ellen Henak, SPD. Milwaukee Appellate; case activity Issue (formulated by On Point): Whether, as a matter of statutory construction, due process and equal protection, the burden of proof on a § 980.08(4)(cg) petition for supervised release of a sexually violent release is on the State. A technical issue, but one significant […]
Expert Opinion – “Jensen” Testimony – Failure to Object; Comment on Another Witness’s Truthfulness – Failure to Object;Ineffective Assistance – Prejudice
State v. Charles R. Black, 2009AP2036-CR, District 4, 1/13/10 court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Black: Devon M. Lee, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; Black BiC; State Resp.; Reply Expert Opinion – “Jensen” Testimony – Failure to Object An expert may testify that a complainant’s behavior is consistent with a sexual […]
Pre-“Daubert” Expert-Opinion Caselaw
Caselaw prior to amendments to §§ 907.01-.03 may be found: here. These sections were amended by 2011 Wis Act 2 (eff. date 2/1/11), as follows: 907.01 Opinion testimony by lay witnesses. (intro.) If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness’s testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or […]
Speedy Trial – Belated Disclosure of Exculpatory Evidence
State v. Daniel W. Kohel, 2010AP1057-CR, District 2, 1/12/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Kohel: Andrew Mishlove; case activity; Kohel BiC; State Resp.; Reply Prosecutorial delay, measuring at least 2 years and perhaps longer, in disclosing potentially exculpatory evidence violated Kohel’s right to speedy trial and therefore supports dismissal with prejudice of […]
State v. Chad W. Ebert, 2010AP1431-CR, District 2, 1/12/11
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Ebert: Chad A. Lanning; case activity; Ebert BiC; State Resp.; Reply Consent-Based Entry ¶7 The Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement does not apply when police have consent to enter a dwelling. State v. Douglas, 123 Wis. 2d 13, 18, 365 N.W.2d 580 (1985). The issue in this appeal is […]
Blood Test Admissibility – Lab Tech Qualifications, Blood Draw
State v. Craig A. Erickson, 2010AP1763-CR, District 2, 1/12/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Erickson: Kirk B. Obear; case activity; Erickson BiC; State Resp.; Reply Laboratory assistant, acting under direction of pathologist and following laboratory procedures, is qualified under § 343.305(5)(b) to draw blood. State v. Penzkofer, 184 Wis. 2d 262, 516 N.W.2d 774 […]
Traffic Stop – Speeding
State v. Thomas R. Paulick, 2010AP1883, District 2, 1/12/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Paulick: Robert C. Raymond; case activity; Paulick BiC; State Resp.; Reply The officer’s conclusion of speeding may be based on a visual estimate “while looking in his rear view mirror,” ¶8, citing City of Milwaukee v. Berry, […]
Guilty Plea Colloquy – Plea Questionnaire; Plea Bargain – Breach: Waiver Doctrine
State v. Henry Edward Reed, Jr., 2009AP3149-CR, District 1, 1/11/11 court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Reed: Basil M. Loeb; case activity; Reed BiC; State Resp. Guilty Plea Colloquy – Plea Questionnaire Reed’s claim that he didn’t understand the significance of read-in offenses is defeated by their coverage in the plea […]
Judicial Estoppel
State v. Basil E. Ryan, Jr., 2011 WI App 21; case activity; Ryan BiC; State Resp.; Reply ¶26 “‘Judicial estoppel is a doctrine that is aimed at preventing a party from manipulating the judiciary as an institution by asserting a position in a legal proceeding and then [later] taking an inconsistent position.’” State v. White, […]
Sanctions – Appellate Procedure
Thomas Vitrano v. Milwaukee Police Department, 2010AP1987, District 1, 1/11/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); pro se; case activity; Resp. Br. footnote 2: We note with some frustration that neither party included a single citation to the record in their respective briefs in violation of Wis. Stat. Rule 809.19(1)(d). Record cites are […]
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.