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
Suppression Hearing Procedure – Burden of Proof Re: Prior Assertion of Right to Counsel as Invalidating Subsequent Waiver
State v. Willie B. Cole, 2008 WI App 178 For Cole: Scott A. Szabrowicz Issue/Holding: ¶38 The parties have not provided, and we have not discovered, any case that addresses the burden of proof in a factual context similar to this—where the defendant asserts he previously invoked his right to counsel as a basis for […]
Suppression Hearing Procedure – Burden of Proof, Generally
State v. Willie B. Cole, 2008 WI App 178 For Cole: Scott A. Szabrowicz Issue/Holding: The State bears the burden of proof, by preponderance of evidence, of a valid waiver of Miranda rights, ¶27. ¶35 As we have stated above, it is the State’s burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant validly waived […]
Statements – Voluntariness – Post-Stress Test (“Honesty Testing”) Statement
State v. Keith A. Davis, 2008 WI 71, on Certification For Davis: Chris A. Gramstrup Issue/Holding: ¶38 In the case at hand, we conclude, as did the circuit court, that the defendant’s statement was voluntary. The record contains no evidence that would give rise to any concerns regarding his personal characteristics. Davis, at the time this occurred, […]
Involuntary Statement (Due to Immunity Grant) – Derivative Evidence: Experts’ Opinions
State v. Danny G. Harrell, 2008 WI App 37 For Harrell: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Expert opinion that Harrell is sexually violent was derived from his compelled, incriminatory statement and therefore also inadmissible, ¶¶14-35. The court essentially tracks the discussion in Mark, which therefore won’t be repeated, and applies it to the particular facts. […]
Involuntary Statement – Derivative Evidence – Admissibility of Subsequent Statement
State v. Charles W. Mark, 2008 WI App 44; on appeal following remand in State v. Mark, 2006 WI 78, 292 Wis. 2d 1, 718 N.W.2d 90 For Mark: Glenn L. Cushing, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding1: ¶20 When an individual has given an involuntary statement, a subsequent statement is also considered involuntary unless it can be “separated […]
Involuntary Statement (Due to Immunity Grant) – Derivative Evidence: Experts’ Opinions
State v. Charles W. Mark, 2008 WI App 44; on appeal following remand in State v. Mark, 2006 WI 78, 292 Wis. 2d 1, 718 N.W.2d 90 For Mark: Glenn L. Cushing, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding1: ¶28 In Kastigar, the … Court stated that, once a defendant demonstrates that he or she has testified under a grant of […]
Voluntariness – Statement to Field Agent
State v. Charles W. Mark, 2008 WI App 44; on appeal following remand in State v. Mark, 2006 WI 78, 292 Wis. 2d 1, 718 N.W.2d 90 For Mark: Glenn L. Cushing, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Parolee’s statement made under grant of immunity (per State v. Evans, 77 Wis. 2d 225, 252 N.W.2d 664 (1977)), was compelled (therefore involuntary) […]
Admissibility of Statements Taken in Foreign Jurisdiction by Wisconsin Officers
State v. Edward Townsend, 2008 WI App 20, PFR filed 2/13/08 For Townsend: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue: Whether admissibility of evidence gathered in a foreign jurisdiction by Wisconsin officers is tested by the law of that jurisdiction or of Wisconsin. Holding: ¶1 … Townsend contends that the circuit court should have suppressed unrecorded statements he […]
Confessions – Post-Voice Stress Analysis – “Honesty Testing” Admissibility: Same Test as Polygraphs
State v. Keith A. Davis, 2008 WI 71, on Certification For Davis: Chris A. Gramstrup Issue/Holding: ¶20 Principles applicable to polygraph testing are equally applicable to voice stress analysis. See Wis. Stat. § 905.065(1); 7 Daniel D. Blinka, Wisconsin Evidence§ 5065.1 (2d ed. 2001) (concluding that there is little reason to treat the forms of honesty testing mentioned in § 905.065 differently, “at least […]
Confessions – Post-Voice Stress Analysis – Admissibility: “Totally Discrete” Statement
State v. Keith A. Davis, 2008 WI 71, on Certification For Davis: Chris A. Gramstrup Issue/Holding1: Admissibility of a statement made in connection with a voice stress analysis (or other form of “honesty test”) turns on whether the statement is “totally discrete” from the testing procedure as gauged by the following factors: ¶23 Under the totality of the […]
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.