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.
Evidence – Daubert; Discovery – Witness Notes; Briefs – Argumentation and SCRs; Closing Argument – Failure to Object; Ineffective Assistance – Failure to Investigate; Newly Discovered Evidence
State v. Christopher D. Jones, 2010 WI App 133; for Jones: Amelia L. Bizzaro; for Amicus, Innocence Network: Jerome F. Buting; BiC; Resp.; Reply; Amicus Br.
Evidence – Daubert – Bullet Traced to Particular Gun
The court rejects “a blanket rule barring as a matter of course all testimony purporting to tie cartridge cases and bullets to a particular gun”:
¶22 Unlike in the federal system,
Jesse Friedman v. Rehal, 2nd Cir No. 08-0297, 8/16/10
2nd Circuit court of appeals decision
Federal Habeas (28 U.S.C. § 2254) – Filing Deadline – Brady Claim
The 2254 filing deadline is one year from the date the state-court conviction becomes “final,” subject to certain exceptions, including one which restarts the limitation period from “the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence,” 28 U.S.C.
Harmless Error; Jury View
State v. Jason M. Bruckbauer, 2009AP1823-CR, District 4, 8/19/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Bruckbauer: Dennis Schertz; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Harmless Error
Any error in admission of a pretrial ID of Bruckbauer from a photo array was harmless, where: the challenged ID didn’t directly implicate him in the homicide but merely placed him at the scene;
TPR
State v. Jaquita B., 2010AP1215, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Jacquita B.: Jane S. Earle
Termination of Jaquita’s parental rights to her two children upheld, where the record shows the trial court properly considered: the children’s likelihood of adoption; permanency of a sustaining care contract in preference to guardianship; Jaquita’s failure to offer stability to the children; and the11-year-old’s desire to return to Jaquita (the last rejected as not in the best if either child because it would lead to their separation form each other).
Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop; OWI – Habitual Offender – Collateral Attack
State v. Randall L. Wegener, 2010AP452-CR, District 1, 8/18/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wegener: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.
Reasonable Suspicion – Traffic Stop
Inclement winter weather didn’t obviate the need to stay within the proper lane, such that crossing the center line, even briefly a few times, provided reasonable suspicion to perform a traffic stop.
¶6 Wegener argues that Fabry did not have reasonable suspicion to conduct a traffic stop because he was driving appropriately for part of the time he was followed and blames his lack of control of his vehicle on the snowy weather conditions.
TPR
Ozaukee Co. HSD v. Sarah H., 2010AP416, District 2, 8/18/10
court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Sarah H.: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate
A CHIPS dispositional order placing a child with a local department and requiring that services be provided to child and family satisfies Sheboygan County DH&HS v. Tanya M.B., 2010 WI 55:
¶5 … What this comes down to is an argument that the dispositional order must contain a magical phrase—“supervision,
Sentence – Factors – Exercise of Constitutional Right; Sentence – Effective Assistance of Counsel
State v. Sabian L. Yunck, 2009AP3020-CR, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Yunck: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Sentence – Factors – Exercise of Constitutional Right
Convicted of violating a domestic abuse order forbidding contact with the mother of his child, Yunck argues that sentence was impermissibly based on his exercise of a constitutional right,
Evidence – Recording – Best Evidence Rule
State v. John D. Harris, 2009AP3140-CR, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Harris: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply
Testimony of an investigator relating the contents of a recording wasn’t inadmissible under the best evidence rule, § 910.02.
¶11 Although the best evidence rule generally requires an original recording to be played in court in order to prove the content of the recording,
Reasonable Suspicion – Terry Stop
State v. Robert Wendt, 2010AP75-CR, District 1, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Wendt: Kirk B. Obear; BiC; Resp.
Reasonable suspicion supported temporary stop of driver of truck idling at 1:30 a.m. behind business in winter with it snow plow up.
¶16 Here, there were “specific and articulable facts,” as set forth by Sergeant Paul during her testimony,
Sentencing – Factors
State v. William Webber, 2010AP9-CR, District 3, 8/17/10
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Webber: Chris A. Gramstrup; BiC; Resp.
On charges of 4th degree sexual assault and obstructing, the sentencing court properly considered, as both aggravating and mitigating, Webber’s 30-year history as a law enforcement officer, as well as his nonconsensual videotaping of his ex-wife.
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.