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.
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decision below: unpublished; for Brenda B.: Leonard D. Kachinsky; prior post, here.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court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Peacock: James R. Phelan; BiC; Resp.; Reply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.
Battery – Self-Defense – Sufficiency of Evidence; Sanctions – Improper Briefing
State v. Richard Martin Kubat, 2010AP509-CR, District 3, 9/21/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Kubat: Marc Grant Kurzman; BiC; Resp.
Battery – Self-Defense – Sufficiency of Evidence
A verbal confrontation between truckers at a truck stop eventuated in Belcher disabling Kubat’s truck and inviting Kubat to get his punk ass out of his cab “and get it.” Kubat accepted the invitation and brought his tire knocker along as his own guest.
Probable Cause – Traffic Violation: Driving in Center Lane; Reasonable Suspicion – OWI
State v. Jerome Hoehne, 2009AP2561-CR, District 4, 9/15/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Hoehen: Bill Ginsberg; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Probable Cause – Traffic Violation: Driving in Center Lane
Driving in the center lane of a 3-lane highway did not support probable cause to arrest for a traffic violation:
¶8 On appeal,
Traffic Stop – Unsafe Backing
City of Tomah v. Matthew Pudlow, 2010AP1044, District 4, 9/15/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Pudlow: Rick Niemeier, Maggie Premo; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Traveling in reverse at 30 mph, near an intersection with a highway, provided reasonable suspicion to stop:
¶13 The totality of the circumstances provided Officer Furlano with reasonable suspicion to justify an investigative stop of the vehicle in order to investigate Pudlow’s driving behavior,
Manipulation of Adult Jurisdiction over Juvenile Offense; Bail Jumping – Jurisdiction to Impose Conditions; Sanctions – Appellate Violations
State v. Drew E. Bergwin, 2010 WI App 137; for Bergwin: Roberta A. Heckes; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Manipulation of Adult Jurisdiction over Juvenile Offense
When the State brings a criminal charge against an adult defendant for an offense committed as a juvenile, the State must affirmatively show that the delay in charging wasn’t intended to manipualte the system to avoid juvenile court jurisdiction,
Interrogation Request for Counsel – Re-Initiation by Suspect; Assertion-Waiver, Right to Silence
State v. Robert Allen, Jr., 2009AP2596-CR , District 1, 9/14/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Allen: Bradley J. Lochowicz; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Interrogation Request for Counsel – Re-Initiation by Suspect
Allen’s invocation of right to counsel terminated his interrogation, but he immediately re-initiated communication with the police by asking “what’s going on”:
¶15 “Even after a suspect in custody asks to speak with a lawyer,
State v. David J. Balliette, 2009AP472, Wis SCT rev grant, 8/31/10
decision below: summary order (not posted); case information here; prior appeal: 2001AP2527-CR; for Balliette: Steven D. Grunder, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue (from AG’s petition for review):
Is an evidentiary hearing into the effectiveness of post-conviction counsel required in every case where the § 974.06 motion merely makes the conclusory allegation that post-conviction counsel was ineffective for not raising additional challenges to the effectiveness of trial counsel on direct review?
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.