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
Guilty Plea – Knowledge of Maximum Penalty
State v. Travis Vondell Cross, 2010 WI 70, on bypass; for Cross: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate; BiC; Resp.; Reply; Cross Supp.; AG Supp. ¶4 We hold that where a defendant is told that he faces a maximum possible sentence that is higher, but not substantially higher, than that authorized by law, the circuit […]
Counsel – Substitution – Deaf Defendant
State v. Dwight Glen Jones, 2010 WI 72, affirming unpublished opinion; for Jones: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; BiC; Resp.; Reply ¶43 The issues presented are first, whether Jones is entitled to a new trial on the grounds that the circuit court wrongly denied his request for substitution of counsel, and second, whether he is […]
Guilty Pleas: Colloquy – Deportation
State v. Hou Erik Vang, 2010 WI App 118; for Vang: John L. Sesini; BiC; Resp.; Reply ¶1 Hou Vang appeals an order denying his motion to withdraw his no contest pleas to second-degree sexual assault of a child and felony bail jumping. Vang argues WIS. STAT. §§ 971.08(1)(c), (2)[1] entitle him to withdraw his pleas because, […]
NGI – “Serious Property Damage”
State v. Wendy A. Brown, 2010 WI App 113; for Brown: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate; BiC; Resp.; Reply The significant risk of “serious property damage” underlying an NGI institutionalization-commitment, § 971.17(3)(a), doesn’t require physical damage to property; loss of money or goods — from identity theft in this instance — suffices: ¶13 The above definitions of […]
Counsel – Waiver – Self-Representation
State v. Rashaad A. Imani, 2010 WI 66, reversing 2009 WI App 98;habeas relief granted 6/22/16; for Imani: Basil M. Loeb; BiC; Resp.; Reply ¶3 We conclude that the circuit court properly denied Imani’s motion to represent himself. First, we determine that Imani did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive the right to counsel. The circuit […]
Court of Appeals Publication Orders, 6/10
publication orders, 6/30/10 2008AP002929 2010 WI App 72 Wendy M. Day v. Allstate Indemnity Company 2009AP000463 2010 WI App 73 Karen Poston v. Andrea L. Burns 2009AP000757 2010 WI App 74 Peter H. and Barbara J. Steuck Living Trust v. Newell L. Easley 2009AP000760 2010 WI App 75 Cottonwood Financial, LTD v. Darcie Estes 2009AP000775 […]
Obstructing, § 946.41 – Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Roy B. Ismert, No. 2009AP1971-CR, District IV, 7/1/10 court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication); for Ismert: Kristen D. Schipper; BiC; Resp.; Reply The evidence was sufficient to support the obstructing element that Ismert knew the police officer had legal authority to stop, question and arrest him. ¶14 We conclude that Lossman […]
Wisconsin Judicial Comm’n v. Hon. Michael J. Gableman, 2010 WI 61 / 62
2010 WI 61 (Abrahamson, CJ, Bradley, Crooks, JJ); 2010 62 (Prosser, Roggensack, Ziegler, JJ); Judicial Conduct Panel Findings, etc.; WJC Brief; Resp.; WJC Reply Judicial Discipline – Campaign-Related Misconduct The court splits 3-3 on whether Justice Gableman’s infamous “loophole” ad violated the Judicial Code. The Chief, et al. (61 bloc), say it did: We three, […]
Plea Bargain – Rejection; Recusal – Judge as Party
State v. Joshua D. Conger, 2010 WI 56, on certification; for Conger: Anthony L. O’Malley; Brief (State); Brief (Conger); Brief (Judge Grimm); Reply (Conger); Amicus (Prosecution Project, UW) Plea Bargain – Rejection A circuit court has post-arraignment authority to reject a proposed plea bargain that would result in amendment to the charge; State v. Kenyon, […]
Pepper v. U.S., USSC No. 09-6822, cert. grant 6/28/10
Docket Decision below (CTA8) Questions Presented: There is a conflict among the United States Courts of Appeals regarding a defendant’s post-sentencing rehabilitation and whether it can support a downward sentencing variance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Whether a federal district judge can consider a defendant’s post-sentencing rehabilitation as a permissible factor supporting a sentencing variance […]
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.