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.
Cesar Guajardo-Palma v. Martinson, 7th Cir No. 10-1726, 9/20/10
7th circuit court of appeals decision
Prison Mail – Access to Courts
As a matter of the due process right to a fair hearing in a civil matter, which includes the right to aid of counsel, a prison inmate is entitled to receive confidential communications from his lawyer. However, the prison is entitled, as a matter of security, to assure itself that such purported communications are indeed from a lawyer authorized to practice in the relevant jurisdiction.
State v. Arlie I. Grenie, 2010AP459-CR, District 4, 9/13/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Grenie: John C. Orth; Steven J. House; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traffic Stop – Blue Lights
Traffic stop for having blue lights lit on front of vehicle, upheld. (§ 347.07(2)(a) bars display of “(a)ny color of light other than white or amber visible from directly in front.”)
¶6 Grenie essentially asks this court to credit testimony by his two witnesses suggesting that the blue lights were “never” operational over the officer’s testimony that he saw the lights lit when Grenie’s Jeep passed him.
TPR – Interest-of-Justice Review
Dane Co. DHS v. Tierra M., 2010AP1648, District 4, 9/23/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Tierra M.: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate
The court rejects the idea that Tierra M.’s termination of parental rights wasn’t “fully tried” under the theory that the subsequently decided Sheboygan County Department of Health & Human Services v. Tanya M.B., 2010 WI 55 requires departmental services relevant to implied as well as explicitly ordered conditions for the children’s return.
Defense win! County’s appeal of dismissal is moot
Milwaukee County v. Earl Z., 2010AP704, District 1, 9/23/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Earl Z.: Jeremy Perri, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
County appeal of dismissal of emergency detention at probable cause stage is moot, where facts supporting that requested detention are no longer operative. Exceptions to mootness — appellate court may reach merits if the issue is sufficiently important or likely repetitious but evasive of review —
Probation Search
State v. Seneca Joseph Boykin, 2009AP2499-CR, District 2, 9/22/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Boykin: Mark A. Schoenfeldt; BiC; Resp.
A probation agent may not evade the warrant requirement by acting as a “stalking horse” for the police in conducting a warrantless search of a probationer’s residence, ¶10. In this instance, probation officer Navis, acting on reliable information that Boykin was using and selling cocaine,
Illegal Plea Bargains – “Reopen and Amend”
State v. James Stoner, III, 2009AP2963, District 2, 9/22/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Stoner: Joshua Davis Uller; BiC; Resp.; Reply
“Reopen-and-amend” plea bargains, “referring to those plea bargains where the State and defendant agree that a judgment of conviction, once announced, will be amended by the State upon the happening of some future event.
State v. Marvin L. Beauchamp, 09AP806, Wis SCT rev granted 9/13/10
decision below: 2010 WI App 42; for Beauchamp: Martin E. Kohler, Craig S. Powell
Issues (from Table of Pending Cases):
Does the confrontation clause bar admission of testimonial dying declarations against a defendant in light of Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 and State v. Manuel, 2005 WI 75, 281 Wis. 2d 554, 697 N.W.2d 811?
Does a defendant’s right to due process of law restrict the substantive use of prior inconsistent statements?
Brown County Dept. of Human Services v. Brenda B., 2010AP321, Wis SCt rev granted 9/13/10
decision below: unpublished; for Brenda B.: Leonard D. Kachinsky; prior post, here.
Issue (from Table of Pending Cases):
Did the trial court correctly exercise its discretion in denying a parent’s motion to withdraw a no contest plea that grounds existed for termination of parental rights without an evidentiary hearing?
State v. Omer Ninham, 2008AP1139, Wis SCt rev granted 9/13/10
decision below: 2009 WI App 64; for Ninham: Frank M. Tuerkheimer; Bryan Stevenson; Rebecca Kiley
Issues (from Table of Pending Cases):
Whether Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) and Graham v. Florida, 130 S.Ct. 2011 (2010) are applicable to revise the sentence of a defendant whose crime(s) were committed as a juvenile.
Whether the sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under state and federal constitutions.
Reasonable Suspicion – No DL
State v. Joseph Donald Peacock, 2010AP954-CR, District 3, 9/21/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Peacock: James R. Phelan; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Because the officer knew from previous contacts, including one a mere 6 days prior, that Peacock’s driver’s license was suspended, he had reasonable suspicion to stop Peacock’s vehicle even though there were multiple occupants and the officer couldn’t see the driver.
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.