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
TPR – Self-Representation – Competency of Court – Delay in Disposition Hearing
Dane County DHS v. Susan P.S., 2006 WI App 100, PFR filed 5/15/06 Issue/Holding: Holding the dispositional hearing beyond the 45-day time limit set by § 48.424(4) did not deprive the trial court of competency to proceed, where good cause existed for continuance under § 48.315(2), namely that the respondent’s attorney was going to be […]
TPR – Self-Representation – Conducting Hearing in Absence of Pro Se Respondent
Dane County DHS v. Susan P.S., 2006 WI App 100, PFR filed 5/15/06 Issue/Holding: Holding the dispositional hearing beyond the 45-day time limit set by § 48.424(4) did not deprive the trial court of competency to proceed, where good cause existed for continuance under § 48.315(2), namely that the respondent’s attorney was going to be […]
TPR – Self-Representation – Standards
Dane County DHS v. Susan P.S., 2006 WI App 100, PFR filed 5/15/06 (published) Issue/Holding1: The same “self-representation competency standards developed in … criminal cases” applies to TPRs, ¶¶9-16. Standards summarized, ¶¶17-23. Though much of this recitation is fairly abstract, the following embellishment of Pickens v. State, 96 Wis. 2d 549, 292 N.W.2d 601 (1980) may be […]
Waiver/Assertion of Rights – Anticipatory (Pre-Custodial) Assertion of Right to Counsel
State v. Thomas G. Kramer, 2006 WI App 133, PFR filed 7/10 For Kramer: Timothy A. Provis Issue: Whether pre-custodial assertion (during standoff with police) of right to counsel barred interrogation following subsequent arrest. Holding: ¶13 Hassel is dispositive here. … Observing that Miranda safeguards apply only to custodial interrogations and that Hassel did not argue he was in custody when […]
Waiver – Re-Administration of Rights: Unnecessary Where Proper Waiver 21 Hours Earlier
State v. Yediael Yokrawn Backstrom, 2006 WI App 114 For Backstrom: Timothy A. Provis Issue: Whether re-administration of Miranda warnings was necessary where the suspect had previously waived those rights following a “full and proper recitation twenty-one hours earlier.” Holding: ¶11 Based on the record presented, we conclude that the trial court did not err in failing to suppress […]
Statements – Suppression: Electronic Recording — Adults
State v. Thomas G. Kramer, 2006 WI App 133, PFR filed 7/10 For Kramer: Timothy A. Provis Issue1: Whether failure to electronically record Kramer’s interrogations requires suppression. Holding1: Although the supreme court exercised supervisory authority granted it under Wis. Const. Art. VII, § 7, to require recording of juvenile interrogations, State v. Jerrell C.J., 2005 WI 105, the grant […]
Briefs – Citing Unpublished Opinion
State v. Juan F. Milanes, 2006 WI App 259, PFR filed 12/7/06For Milanes: Joan M. Boyd Issue/Holding: ¶21 … Further, appellate counsel cited an unpublished case in her opening brief, contrary to Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(3). This does not appear to be inadvertent, since the citation ends with the parenthetical “(unpublished).” Our supreme court has […]
Briefs – Citing Unpublished Decisions – Generally
City of Sheboygan v. Steven Nytsch, 2006 WI App 191, PFR filed 9/11/06 For Nytsch: Chad A. Lanning Issue/Holding: ¶18 n. 6: …This court is not so naïve as to believe that unpublished opinions, whether one-judge opinions, per curiam opinions or authored opinions sit in a file serving as dinner for book lice. [A tiny, […]
Enlargement of Direct Appeal Deadline Based on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel – Habeas in Court of Appeals as Exclusive Mechanism
State ex rel. Luis Santana v. Endicott, 2006 WI App 13 Issue/Holding1: A claim that lapsed direct appeal rights should be restored on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel must be sought via habeas filed in the court of appeals, pursuant to State v. Knight, 168 Wis. 2d 509, 484 N.W.2d 540 (1992): ¶1 […]
Sentence Credit – Reconfinement and New Sentence, Concurrent
State v. Donald Odom, 2006 WI App 145 For Odom: Eileen Miller Carter; J.C. Moore, SPD, Milwaukee Trial Issue/Holding: Odom is entitled to full sentence credit on both his reconfinement and new sentence, given that they are concurrent, ¶34: (B)ecause Odom was sentenced on the same day to concurrent sentences for his revocation of extended release […]
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.