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
§ 940.10(1), Homicide by Negligent Operation of Vehicle — Jury Instructions — Elements
State v. Nicole Schutte, 2006 WI App 135, PFR filed 7/21/06 For Schutte: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the trial court invaded the jury’s province when it instructed that the court of appeals had held in State v. Johannes, 229 Wis. 2d 215, 598 N.W.2d 299 (Ct. App. 1999) that a criminally negligent act had occurred […]
§ 940.31(1)(b), Kidnapping – Elements & Mitigation
State v. Reinier A. Ravesteijn, 2006 WI App 250 For Ravesteijn: Rudolph L. Oldeschulte Issue/Holding: Kidnapping is mitigated from a Class B to Class C felony if the victim is released without permanent physical injury prior to the first witness’s testimony, ¶17. When accepting a guilty plea to Class B kidnapping the court must ascertain a […]
§ 940.225(2)(h), Sexual Assault by Correctional Staff Member – Courthouse Bailiff not “Correctional Staff”
State v. Delano L. Terrell, 2006 WI App 166 For Terrell: Martin E. Kohler, Brian Kinstler, Christopher M. Eippert Issue: Whether a sheriff’s deputy assigned to work as a court bailiff is a “correctional staff member” so as to come within § 940.225(2)(h). Holding: A “correctional staff member” is defined as an individual who works […]
§ 940.25(1)(am), Injury by Intoxicated Use of Motor Vehicle – Constitutionality
State v. Eric Benjamin Gardner, 2006 WI App 92 For Gardner: Michael K. Gould, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding1: The elements of § 940.25(1)(am) – the defendant operated a vehicle with “a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or her blood, and the operation of the vehicle caused great bodily harm to the […]
§ 940.32(2) & (3)(c), Stalking — Elements, Generally
State v. Ronnie L. Thums, 2006 WI App 173 For Thums: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Use of a weapon is an element of stalking with a dangerous weapon, and the offense has therefore not been committed until the weapon has been employed (though the offense of stalking has been), ¶8 and id., […]
§ 940.42, Attempted Intimidation of Witness – Elements – Sufficiency of Evidence: Addressing Parent of Child-Witness
State v. Alvin M. Moore, 2006 WI App 61, PFR filed 3/21/06 For Moore: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether an effort at dissuading a child witness which was directed at the child’s mother satisfies the elements of attempted intimidation of a witness, § 940.42. Holding: ¶10 To prove attempted intimidation of Tamika, […]
§ 940.42, Attempted Intimidation of Witness – Multiplicity: Multiple Counts, Same Witness
State v. Alvin M. Moore, 2006 WI App 61, PFR filed 3/21/06 For Moore: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether separate counts are supported for attempted intimidation of the same witness, representing each separate letter sent by the defendant to the witness imploring her not to testify against him. Holding: Multiple counts are […]
§ 943.10, Burglary – Sufficiency of Evidence – Fingerprint Evidence
State v. Jeffrey Lorenzo Searcy, 2006 WI App 8 For Searcy: Joseph L. Sommers Issue/Holding1: ¶23 Searcy claims the only evidence linking him to the Hoffman burglary was his fingerprint on the window screen in the Hoffmans’ bedroom. He argues that the mere presence of his fingerprint, standing alone, is insufficient to connect him to […]
Resisting, § 946.41 – “Lawful Authority” – Initially Unlawful Act by Police Doesn’t Preclude Conviction for Defendant’s Subsequent Conduct
State v. Anna Annina, 2006 WI App 202 For Van Hout: Robert R. Henak Issue/Holding: Although police entry into the defendant’s house was pursuant to a search warrant later declared to be invalid, the defendant’s acts in response to that entry amounted to disorderly conduct which did allow for an arrest under lawful police authority; defendant […]
Obstructing / Resisting, § 946.41 – “Lawful Authority,” Established by Probable Cause to Arrest
State v. Charles E. Young, 2006 WI 98, affirming 2004 WI App 227 For Young: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: By fleeing from a police command to stop, the defendant provided probable cause to arrest for obstructing, and the officer therefore was acting with “lawful authority” under § 946.41(1), ¶¶77-78. Also see U.S. v. Muhammad, 2nd Cir […]
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.