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.
SCOW holds that appeal from Watts review is not moot; applies de novo standard (for now) and affirms
Racine County v. R.P.L., 2026 WI 26, 7/7/26, affirming an unpublished decision of the court of appeals; case activity
SCOW holds that this appeal from an annual review of a protective placement is not moot, somewhat reluctantly applies the governing standard of review, and affirms.
In light of SCOW’s decision in M.J.B, COA reverses circuit court’s order dismissing Ch. 51 petition because expert report was not timely.
Ozaukee County v. T.D.D., 2025AP2257, 7/8/26, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA reversed the circuit court’s order dismissing Ozaukee County’s petition for commitment under Chapter 51 in light of SCOW’s decision in M.J.B. that failing to comply with the 48-hour deadline to make expert reports available to counsel did not divest the circuit court of competency.
COA finds consent to blood test was voluntary under since-repealed provision of Implied Consent Statute
State v. Richard A. Tourtillot, 2024AP1831, 7/7/26, District III (not recommended for publication); case activity
The COA determined the defendant’s consent to a blood draw was voluntary under a since-repealed portion of the Implied Consent Law.
COA affirms suppression order because officer’s mistake of law did not provide reasonable suspicion for traffic stop.
State v. Michael P. Bundy, 2025AP1072, 6/25/26, District IV (not eligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order suppressing the fruits of a traffic stop because an officer’s mistake of law regarding the driver’s suspected violation of the window tinting regulation did not provide reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle.
SCOTUS reinstates murder conviction because clearly established federal law does not require jury to determine legality of defendant’s confession.
McCarthy v. Hernandez, USSC No. 25-748, 6/22/2026, reversing a decision of the 2nd Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS reversed the court of appeals’ decision granting habeas relief to a man convicted in 2016 of murdering a six-year old boy in 1979 because the lower court did not correctly apply clearly established federal law regarding the jury’s role in assessing the legality of the defendant’s confessions.
SCOW holds criminal courts cannot order involuntary medication of a defendant committed for purposes of competency restoration on basis of dangerousness
State v. N.K.B., 2026 WI 22, 6/26/26, affirming a published decision of the court of appeals; case activity
SCOW holds that criminal courts cannot order involuntary medication of a defendant committed for purposes of competency restoration on the basis that he or she is dangerous.
SCOTUS holds that cell phone user has reasonable expectation of privacy in location history data; remands to court of appeals to assess whether a geofence warrant was reasonable.
Chatrie v. United States, USSC No. 25-112, 6/29/2026, reversing a decision of the 4th Circuit, Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)
SCOTUS determined that police conduct a search when they gain access to location history data from a third party because a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in records about his or her cell phone’s location. The Court remanded to the federal court of appeals to determine whether the geofence warrant at issue was reasonable.
COA reverses sentencing court’s order de facto terminating defendant’s parental rights
State v. Dominic L. Brister, 2024AP1516-CR, 6/30/26, District I (recommended for publication); case activity
COA issues a broad defense win, holding that the First Amendment forbids the extreme no-contact order entered in this case.
SCOW refuses to reconsider its previous decisions on mootness, holds that admission of hearsay evidence was harmless
Waukesha County v. R.D.T., 2026 WI 24, 6/30/26, affirming an unpublished decision of the court of appeals; case activity
SCOW refuses an invitation to retreat from previous decisions making it difficult for a Chapter 51 appeal to be moot but ultimately holds that R.D.T. is not entitled to relief as a result of the allegedly improper admission of hearsay evidence.
COA certifies sentencing challenge with potentially broad-sweeping impact
State v. Nicholas B. Selerski., 2024AP1846-CR, 6/25/26, District IV (certification opinion); denied 10/14/25; case activity
In a case that might make many appellate attorneys justifiably nervous, COA asks whether we’ve all been getting sentencing law wrong for decades.
Important Posts
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.