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
Review of Waived Issue: Plain Error – Generally
State v. James D. Lammers, 2009 WI App 136, PFR filed 9/16/09For Lammers: Amelia L. Bizzaro Issue/Holding: ¶12 “Plain error” means a clear or obvious error, one that likely deprived the defendant of a basic constitutional right. State v. Frank, 2002 WI App 31, ¶25, 250 Wis. 2d 95, 640 N.W.2d 198 (Ct. App. 2001). […]
State’s Waiver – Escalona-Naranjo (Serial Litigation) Argument
State v. James D. Miller, 2009 WI App 111, PFR filed 8/3/09 Pro se Issue/Holding: State failure to argue, in the trial court, that Miller’s 974.06 motion was barred under Escalona-Naranjo waived the argument on appeal: ¶25 We conclude that application of the waiver rule is appropriate here, and therefore decline to address the State’s […]
Issue Waiver: Jury Instruction – Failure to Object to Trial Court Response to Jury Question
State v. Christopher F. Becker, 2009 WI App 59, PFR filed 5/8/09 For Becker: Jeremy C. Perri, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: By failing to object, defendant waived right to challenge judicial response to deliberating jury’s question, notwithstanding conceded unanimity problems in the response: ¶15 Nevertheless, we must agree with the State and hold that Becker […]
Restitution – Damages – School District: Employees’ “Lost Productivity” Due to Bomb Scare Evacuation
State v. Derick G. Vanbeek, 2009 WI App 37, PFR filed 3/13/09 For Vanbeek: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: On conviction for making a false bomb scare, § 947.015, Vanbeek is liable in restitution to the school district for salaries and benefits paid to teachers and staff during the resulting 4-hour evacuation, because the school district […]
Appellate procedure – Harmless Error: Public Trial – Violation as Structural Error
State v. Dhosi J. Ndina, 2009 WI 21, affirming 2007 WI App 268 For Ndina: Richard L. Kaiser Issue/Holding: ¶43 If a defendant’s right to a public trial is determined to have been violated, the defendant need not show prejudice; the doctrine of harmless error does not apply to structural errors. [15] [15] See Neder […]
Resentencing – Increase in Original Sentence Upon Resentencing Ordered by Trial Court (to Correct Illegal Sentence)
State v. Lord L. Sturdivant, 2009 WI App 5, PFR filed 1/13/09 For Sturdivant: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: The initial sentence was “illegal” (because the court did not order sufficient time on extended supervision). The court granted defendant’s motion for resentencing (because of the illegality) and ordered an increase in supervision time (rather than […]
Emergency Detention, § 51.15(10) – Untimely Probable Cause Hearing, Lost Competency of Court to Proceed
Dane County v. Stevenson L.J., 2009 WI App 84 For Stevenson L.J.: Ruth N. Westmont Issue/Holding: Where Stevenson L.J. was detained on an “emergency statement” in one county (Brown), then transferred to another (Dane) before a probable cause hearing, a new emergency statement in Dane County did not establish a new 72-hour time limit for a […]
SVP Commitments – Evidence – References to Post-Commitment Re-Evaluations
State v. Carl Kaminski, 2009 WI App 175 For Kaminski: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: “Infrequent references to annual re-evaluation” were not “sufficiently egregious to diminish the jury’s sense of responsibility for its verdict,” ¶¶20-24.
SVP Commitments – Evidence – References to Psychopathic Treatment Program
State v. Carl Kaminski, 2009 WI App 175 For Kaminski: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Testimony by a state’s expert to the effect that the only treatment program for psychopaths is at Sand Ridge did not require a new trial under the theory that it implicitly suggested commitment would be in the community’s and […]
Sentence Modification – New Factor – DOC Determination of Ineligibility for Boot Camp (CIP)
State v. Jeremy D. Schladweiler, 2009 WI App 177 Pro se Issue/Holding: DOC determination that an inmate isn’t eligible for CIP doesn’t constitute a new factor, notwithstanding the sentencing court’s determination that he is eligible. ¶11 Here, the trial court determined that Schladweiler was eligible for the CIP. … The sentencing court expressly indicated that participation […]
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.