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.
Thomas Socha v. Pollard, 7th Cir. No. 09-1733, 09/03/2010
7th Circuit decision; on habeas review of Wis. opinion No. 2005AP2599-CR
Habeas – Filing Deadline – Tolling
The District Court had authority to grant Socha’s pre-filing, pre-deadline request to extend the 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) deadline for his habeas petition, made on the ground of equitable tolling.
… First, there is no absolute bar imposed by Article III on judicial actions closely connected with a case or controversy that has not yet been filed.
SVP – Retroactivity of Qualifying Offense Legislation; State’s Waiver; Newly Discovered Evidence – Re-normed Actuarial
State v. Christopher Melendrez, 2009AP2070, District 4, 9/2/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Melendrez: David R. Karpe; BiC; Resp.; Reply
SVP – Retroactivity of Qualifying Offense Legislation
Third-degree sexual assault wasn’t an SVP-qualifying offense when Melendrez plea-bargained a reduction of 2nd-degree sexual assault to 3rd. But by the time he was released from prison,
Obstructing – Unanimity – Course of Conduct; Obstructing – Sufficiency of Proof
State v. Jennette L. Ellifritz, 2010AP713-CR, District 2, 9/1/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Ellifritz: Gary Grass; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Obstructing – Unanimity – Course of Conduct
Because Ellifritz’s actions occurred during a single course of action, over a short (40-second) period of time, instructional failure to require agreement as to which separate act constituted obstructing didn’t violate her right to unanimous verdict;
Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop
State v. Charles G. Jury, 2010AP622-CR, District 2, 9/1/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Jury: Eric R. Pangburn; BiC; Resp.
Reasonable suspicion supported stop of vehicle for any or all of the following reasons: dim tail light; necklace hanging from rearview mirror so as to obstruct driver’s view; driving on double yellow line.
Reasonable Suspicion – Continued Detention
City of Oshkosh v. Richard A. Selquist, 2010AP862, District 2, 9/1/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Selquist: Walter Arthur Piel, Jr.; BiC; Resp.; Reply
The police had reasonable suspicion to continue temporary detention of Selquist and to request filed sobriety testing while investigating a traffic accident:
¶7 … In reviewing whether the officer’s further investigation and request for field sobriety tests were warranted,
Interrogation – Ambiguous Request for Counsel; Joinder/Severance; Evidence – Autopsy Photos
State v. Adamm D.J. Linton, 2010 WI App 129; for Linton: Joseph E. Redding; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Interrogation – Ambiguous Request for Counsel
Initial custodial questioning terminated when Linton invoked his right to silence. During subsequent re-interrogation, Linton said, “when I asked for a lawyer earlier, why wasn’t he appointed to me?” The detective indicated that if Linton was asking for a lawyer then the police would “just stop talking to”
Habeas – Effective Assistance – Stun Belt
John M. Stephenson v. Levenhagen, 7th Cir No. 09-2924, 08/26/2010
7th Cir decision; petition for rehearing denied 1/14/11, 3 dissents from denial of en banc review
Habeas – Effective Assistance – Stun Belt
Counsel’s failure to object to placement of stun belt on Stephenson during trial was held by the state court to be deficient: accepting that conclusion (albeit with apparent reluctance), the federal court holds on habeas review that the deficiency wasn’t prejudicial.
Aris Etherly v. Davis, 7th Cir. No. 09-3535, 08/25/2010
7th Cir. decision; Order denying rehearing and amending opinion, 10/10/15
Habeas – Voluntary Statement – Juvenile
State court determination that juvenile’s custodial statement to police was voluntary wasn’t objectively unreasonable., notwithstanding his age (15), borderline intellectual functioning and lack of criminal background. “(I)t is the totality of the circumstances underlying a juvenile confession, rather than the presence or absence of a single circumstance, that determines whether or not the confession should be deemed voluntary.”
Incest – Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Nick J. W., 2009AP2030-CR, District 4, 8/26/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Nick J.W.: Joseph L. Sommers; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Incest – Sufficiency of Evidence
The 16-year-old complainant’s testimony that her biological father had sex with her sufficed to prove the crime of incest, the court rejecting the defense argument that, because she didn’t look at the perpetrator,
In Camera Inspection, Shiffra/Green Material
State v. Donovan L. Lewis, 2009AP2531-CR, District 4, 8/26/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Lewis: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Defense access to a complainant’s privileged counseling records requires first convincing the trial court to conduct an in camera inspection to see if the records contain information material to innocence. And that requires showing a reasonable likelihood the records contain non-cumulative material information.
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.