On Point

court of appeals decision; for Jeffrey A.W.: Hans P. Koesser
Resp Br; Reply

Counsel – Adequacy of Investigation
Attempt to demonstrate absence of herpes in defendant—an issue central to this sexual assault prosecution—was, although  failure, not product of deficient performance, ¶12:

There is no question that trial counsel’s investigation yielded the wrong information. But that does not necessarily equate to deficient performance.

court of appeals decision; for Garcia: Paul M. Ruby
Resp Br

Right to Testify – After-the-Fact Evidentiary Hearing
Remedy for failure to conduct colloquy required by State v. Weed, 2003 WI 85, doesn’t automatically result in new trial but, rather, supports postconviction evidentiary hearing.

Go: here.

Go: here.

Go: here.

court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication)

Arrest – Probable Cause
Arrest based on probable cause where drug informant identified photo of Laster as person he just bought drugs from.

court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication)

Delinquency – Venue
Delinquency venue is where the juvenile resides, § 938.185(1)(a), which is where the legal custodian establishes the child’s domicile; legal custodian of Jennifer Z. was Taylor Co. Human Services, therefore she resided in Taylor Co.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel – Eliciting Incriminating Testimony
Counsel’s eliciting incriminating testimony, without tactical reason, leading to added count was ineffective.

State v. Jeffrey A.W., 2010 WI App 29; for Jeffrey A.W.: Hans P. Koesser

Adequacy of Counsel Investigation

Counsel’s attempt to demonstrate the absence of herpes in the defendant—an issue central to this sexual assault prosecution—was, although a failure, not the product of deficient performance.

¶12  There is no question that trial counsel’s investigation yielded the wrong information. But that does not necessarily equate to deficient performance.

court of appeals decision; for Garcia: Paul M. Ruby

Defendant’s Right to Testify – After-the-Fact Evidentiary Hearing on Required Colloquy
Although a colloquy is required by State v. Weed, 2003 WI 85 before the defense rests without testimony from the defendant, failure to conduct the colloquy doesn’t automatically result in new trial but, rather, supports postconviction evidentiary hearing procedure.

¶14  The supreme court in Weed mandated a simple colloquy for courts to employ when a defendant chooses not to testify at trial. 

court of appeals decision (1-judge; not for publication)

Vehicle Stop – Rear Plate State Name Obscured
Stop proper where rear plate bracket obscured name of state, even though “America’s Dairyland” visible at bottom of plate;  pretextual nature of stop irrelevant.