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.
Defense Win! COA suppresses statements obtained while trying to ascertain what defendant threw into garbage after having been arrested
State v. Kale K. Keding, 2022AP1373-CR & 2022AP1374-CR, District IV, 8/31/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
In an eminently readable and refreshing opinion, COA methodically works through a battery of counterarguments to hold that police could not use statements Keding made after having been asked about a tissue he discarded into a wastebasket while in police custody.
COA: officer had probable cause to conduct PBT
State v. Roger A. Wolf, Jr., 2022AP1539, 8/24/23, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
An responding officer encountered Wolf, head bloodied, near a crashed motorcycle and a dead deer. Wolf said he’d been “drinking all day” but that an unidentified third person, not on scene, had been driving the bike when it hit the deer. He argues the officer lacked probable cause to perform a preliminary breath test.
COA says lawyer not ineffective for not asserting self-defense in DC
State v. Michael Ross Straight, 2022AP2012, 8/24/23, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A woman identified as “A.B.” got out of her car and approached Straight with a machete. Straight, fearing for his life, grabbed A.B., knocked her to the ground, and took the machete from her. He then straddled A.B. with the point of the machete pointing toward her. A friend on scene yelled at Straight; Straight replied “what are you going to do about it?” Then he got up, dropped the machete, and walked away. A.B. departed in her car with the machete.
August 2023 publication order
On August 30, 2023, the court of appeals ordered publication of one criminal law related decision:
State v. Gregory L. Cundy, 2023 WI App 41 (Applying Payton rule to invalidate “Terry stop” inside home)
COA disregards business as usual and reverses default judgment in Milwaukee County TPR
State v. C.D., 2023AP1025, District I, 8/29/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
In an exciting defense win, District I signals a willingness to critically review default orders entered in Milwaukee County.
Defense win! County failed to prove patient received a reasonable explanation of proposed medication
Marinette County v. A.M.N., 2022AP1395, District III, 8/29/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
Faced with a weak record, COA holds that A.M.N. cleared imposing hurdles to relief and reverses the lower court’s medication order as there was no proof he received a reasonable explanation of the proposed medication. However, despite a hearing rife with inadmissible hearsay, COA upholds the underlying commitment order under a harmless error analysis.
Seventh Circuit rejects factual findings of lower courts but affirms on the merits in close habeas loss
Jones v. Cromwell, 75 F.4th 722 (7th Cir. 2022).
In a disappointing defense loss, the Seventh Circuit holds that, at least under these circumstances, the defendant’s request for a “public pretender” was sufficiently ambiguous such that police had no obligation to cease their interrogation.
Defense Win! Recommitment reversed based on erroneous admission of hearsay testimony
Waupaca County v. G.T.H., 2022AP2146, District IV, 8/24/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
Contrary to what has seemed like a steady stream of unsuccessful hearsay-based Chapter 51 appeals, see e.g., here, here, here, here, and here, G.T.H. succussfully convinces the court of appeals to reverse his recommitment, which was based on extensive hearsay testimony.
Yelling and throwing “roll of tape” at father sufficient to establish dangerousness under Ch. 51
Kenosha County v. L.A.T., 2022AP1730, District II, 8/23/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
L.A.T. (“Linda”) convinced the court of appeals the circuit court erred by admitting and relying on hearsay testimony from a psychiatrist to support its dangerousness finding. However, the court holds that sufficient non-hearsay evidence established that “Linda’s pattern of anger and aggressive behavior that caused others to seek law enforcement assistance…was sufficient to establish that others were in reasonable fear of violent behavior and/or serious physical harm at Linda’s hands.” (Op., ¶3).
COA resurrects mootness doctrine to dodge challenges to Ch. 51 order
Winnebago County v. J.L.C., 2023AP200, District II, 8/23/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
Although most litigators believed that arguments about mootness in 51 appeals were now settled, COA resurrects the mootness doctrine to deny relief in this appeal of an expired order.
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.