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
Consent — Lawful Seizure Alone Isn’t Coercive
State v. John J. Hartwig, 2007 WI App 160, PFR filed 5/22/07 For Hartwig: Wright C. Laufenberg Issue/Holding: The trial court misread State v. Reginald Jones, 2005 WI App 26, to hold that consent to search is invalid whenever the person has been seized; rather, that case holds only that consent may be invalid when made following illegal […]
Consent — Absence of Coercion
State v. Philip R. Bons, 2007 WI App 124, PFR filed 4/24/07 For Bons: Vladimir M. Gorokhovsky Issue/Holding: ¶18 The State has satisfied its burden to show the consent was voluntary. There is no suggestion of misrepresentation, deception, trickery or intimidation. The officers did not use weapons or force or otherwise take custody of Bons. Bons […]
Warrantless Entry of Residence – Generally
State v. Dwight M. Sanders, 2007 WI App 174, affirmed on different ground, 2008 WI 85 For Sanders: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: To overcome its presumptive prohibition, warrantless entry of a residence must be supported by both probable cause and exigent circumstances (the latter including hot pursuit, threat to safety, risk of destroyed evidence, and […]
Consent – Acquiescence – Generally
State v. Gary A. Johnson, 2007 WI 32, affirming 2006 WI App 15 For Johnson: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶16 When the purported legality of a warrantless search is based on the consent of the defendant, that consent must be freely and voluntarily given. State v. Phillips, 218 Wis. 2d 180, 197, 577 N.W.2d 794 […]
§ 948.31, Interference with Child Custody – Sufficiency of Evidence – Presence of Parent
State v. Isaiah Bowden, 2007 WI App 234 For Bowden: Jason R. Farris Issue/Holding: Conviction for interference with custody, § 948.31(2), doesn’t require that the child be within the parent’s immediate presence or control: ¶18 The State posits that the withholding method of interference focuses on permission, not being in the parent’s presence. We agree. The […]
Search & Seizure – Applicability of Exclusionary Rule: Private / Government Search — UPS
State v. Christopher D. Sloan, 2007 WI App 146 For Sloan: Thomas E. Hayes Issue/Holding: Inspection of package by UPS personnel and subsequent disclosure of its contents to police didn’t require a warrant, because of lack of governmental involvement in the initial search. ¶10 A private party’s discovery, and subsequent disclosure to law enforcement, of […]
Federal Habeas – Procedure – Appellate – Recall Mandate
Michael Allen Lambert v. Buss, 489 F.3d 779 (Nos. 03-1015 & 05-2610, 6/12/07) Issue/Holding: A motion to recall the mandate is subject to successive-petition restrictions.
(State) Habeas Corpus – Venue
State ex rel. Steven M. Rupinski v. Smith, 2007 WI App 4 For Rupinski: Daniel R. Drigot Issue/Holding: ¶12 n. 3: The State challenges the venue of Milwaukee County as improper because Rupinski is confined at the Oshkosh Correctional Institution located in Winnebago County. The State argues that, as a result, the writ was improperly filed […]
Federal Habeas – Procedure — Appellate — Certificate of Appealability: Necessity
Rufus West v. Schneiter, 485 F. 3d 393 (7th Cir. 5/4/07) Issue/Holding: “we now join the other circuits that have considered this issue and hold that §2253(c)(1) requires a certificate of appealability for any appeal in a proceeding under §2255 or where ‘the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court.’” The […]
Federal Habeas – Procedure – Appellate – Jurisdiction – Timeliness of NOA – Prison Mailbox Rule
Edmund Ingram v. Jones, 507 F. 3d 640 (Nos. 06-2766 & 06-2879, 11/14/07) Issue/Holding: If a prison has a “legal mailing system,” and the inmate isn’t obligated to pay postage for legal mail, then the notice of appeal may be deemed filed when deposited in the system even without prepaid postage. However, “if a prison does […]
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.