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
Disposition – Discretion Properly Exercised
Waukesha Co. DHHS v. Teodoro E., 2008 WI App 16, District 2 (published) Issue/Holding: The trial court properly exercised discretion in terminating rights: ¶25 Teodoro finally argues that at the dispositional stage, the trial court erroneously determined that termination of his parental rights would be in the best interests of the children. This determination is […]
Conditions – Possibility of Meeting: Deported Parent
Waukesha Co. DHHS v. Teodoro E., 2008 WI App 16, District 2 (published) Issue/Holding: Conditions imposed for non-termination of a deported parent’s children weren’t impossible, notwithstanding parent’s inability to return to country: ¶23 But as the circuit court noted, “Mexico is not prison” and Teodoro remained free to work on and meet many of the […]
Federal Habeas: Procedure — Appellate — Standard of Review — State Court Adjudication on Merits
Allen A. Muth v. Frank, 412 F.3d 808 (7th Cir 2005) Issue/Holding: AEDPA requirement of state court adjudication on merits requires neither “well-articulated or even correct decision”; state court need not offer any reasons, so that summary disposition would satisfy requirement. In short: it “is perhaps best understood by stating what it is not: it is not the […]
Pre-Miranda Silence
State v. Thomas S. Mayo, 2007 WI 78, affirming unpublished opinion For Mayo: Keith A. Findley, UW Law School Issue/Holding: ¶46 We agree with Mayo’s position, and the State’s concession at oral argument, that the prosecutor’s remarks on Mayo’s pre-Miranda silence, and the testimony she elicited in that regard, during the State’s opening statement and case-in-chief, violated Mayo’s […]
Miranda – Custody
State v. Jeffrey L. Torkelson, 2007 WI App 272, PFR filed 11/30/07 For Torkelson: Timothy A. Provis Issue/Holding: Custody, for purposes of Miranda, requires that the suspect’s freedom be restricted to a degree associated with formal arrest, and is as gauged by a multi-factor test articulated in State v. Zan Morgan, 2002 WI App 124, ¶¶13-14. None of those […]
Miranda – Waiver – Ambiguous Assertion
State v. Heather A. Markwardt, 2007 WI App 242, PFR filed 11/29/07 For Markwardt: Richard Hahn Issue/Holding: ¶35 The circuit court relied on statements Markwardt made one hour and eleven minutes into the interview for its ruling that she had properly asserted her right to remain silent. Her exact words were: “Then put me in jail. Just […]
Statements – Voluntariness – Coercion – “Confrontational,” Loud Interrogation: Insufficient
State v. Heather A. Markwardt, 2007 WI App 242, PFR filed 11/29/07 For Markwardt: Richard Hahn Issue/Holding: Markwardt’s in-custody statement was voluntary: any stress she was under was “unrelated to police conduct” (¶37); she didn’t unequivocally assert her rights (¶40); that the interrogator “was at times confrontational and raised his voice is not improper police procedure and does […]
Briefs – Appendix: Importance of, and Sanction for Falsely Certifying Compliance
State v. Philip R. Bons, 2007 WI App 124, PFR filed 4/24/07 Issue/Holding: ¶23 Applying the plain language of the rule, Gorokhovsky’s certification of compliance is false. His appendix contains only a copy of the judgment of conviction, the notice of motion and motion to suppress, and the notice of intent to pursue postconviction relief. […]
Briefs — Argument — Pinpoint Citations for Cited Caselaw
State v. Darren A. Kliss, 2007 WI App 13 For Kliss: Michael C. Witt Issue/Holding: ¶6 n. 4: We observe that Kliss, in his appellate brief, is inconsistent in his use of pinpoint citations for the case law he invokes to support his legal contentions. Wisconsin Stat. Rule 809.19(1)(e) requires the appellant to support its […]
Briefs – Argument – Concession of Error by State
State v. Gary A. Johnson, 2007 WI 32, affirming 2006 WI App 15For Johnson: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶14 … The State concedes before this court, as it did in the court of appeals, that Johnson did not freely consent to the search of his vehicle. [4] … [4] The dissent faults […]
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.