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
Binding Authority – Dicta
State v. Steven A. Harvey, 2006 WI App 26 For Harvey: Christopher William Rose Issue/Holding: ¶18 However, our rejection of the Committee’s definition of cunnilingus does not fully resolve this issue since, as we have observed, this definition met with at least tacit approval by the Childs court. However, we are not bound by theChilds case because it […]
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Particular Examples: Reckless Endangering — Competing Inferences
State v. Wayne A. Sutton, 2006 WI App 118, PFR filed 6/18/06 For Sutton: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the guilty plea to first-degree reckless endangering, amended from battery, was supported by a factual basis. Holding: ¶21 At the plea hearing, the State presented the basis for the amended charge of first-degree reckless […]
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Particular Instances: Causing Child Prostitution
State v. Lawrence Payette, 2008 WI App 106, PFR filed 6/30/08 For Payette: Robert R. Henak; Amelia L. Bizzaro Issue/Holding: Allegations in the complaint of repeated “dope dating” (giving a minor cocaine on multiple occasions in exchange for sex) established a factual basis for guilty plea to causing the child to practice prostitution within the […]
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Particular Instances: Kidnapping
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 […]
Plea Bargains – Breach: By Defendant – Attack on Conviction Contrary to Terms of Agreement – Remedy: Dismissal of Appeal
State v. Lawrencia Ann Bembenek, 2006 WI App 198, PFR filed 10/3/06 For Bembenek: Joseph F. Owens, Mary L. Woehrer Issue/Holding: Bembenek breached her plea agreement (which contained a no-attack or appeal clause) by filing a motion for DNA testing to establish her innocence; the remedy for this breach is dismissal of her appeal of […]
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis — Particular Instances: Sexual Assault (Intercourse/Cunnilingus)
State v. Steven A. Harvey, 2006 WI App 26 For Harvey: Christopher William Rose Issue/Holding: Rejecting the JI Committee definition of “cunnilingus,” the court “ conclude(s) that the statutory scheme of the sexual assault law does not require proof of ‘stimulation of the clitoris or vulva,’” ¶¶11-21. ¶21 The complaint and the undisputed evidence presented […]
Guilty Pleas – Plea Bargains – Breach: By Prosecutor: State’s Allocutionary Presentation of Victim and Others
State v. Steven A. Harvey, 2006 WI App 26 For Harvey: Christopher William Rose Issue/Holding: Plea bargain, which permitted State to comment on facts but not to make specific sentencing recommendation was not violated by State’s presentation of victim and others who themselves asked for maximum penalty: ¶40 We first disagree that the State breached […]
Guilty Pleas – Procedure – Need for, and Waiver of, Interpreter
State v. Reinier A. Ravesteijn, 2006 WI App 250 For Ravesteijn: Rudolph L. Oldeschulte Issue/Holding: ¶6 Ravesteijn, a citizen of the Netherlands, argues that the trial court was obligated to consider whether he needed an interpreter and to obtain his personal waiver of the right to an interpreter. See State v. Neave, 117 Wis. 2d […]
Guilty Pleas – Factual Basis – Alford Plea – Generally
State v. Anna Annina, 2006 WI App 202 For Annina: Robert R. Henak Issue/Holding: ¶9 Annina seeks to withdraw her Alford plea on the grounds that a manifest injustice has occurred. “Withdrawal of a plea following sentencing is not allowed unless it is necessary to correct a manifest injustice.” State v. Smith, 202 Wis. 2d 21, 25, 549 […]
Examination of Witness – Open-Ended Question
State v. Roberto Vargas Rodriguez, 2006 WI App 163, PFR filed 8/28/06 For Rodriguez: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶39 Questions that call for a narrative are generally improper because they do not alert court and counsel to the subject about which the witness is about to testify. There are exceptions, however, and whether […]
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.