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
Earned Release Program (“ERP”) — Exercise of Discretion to Determine Eligibility
State v. James L. Montroy, 2005 WI App 230 For Montroy: Jay E. Heit; Stephanie L. Finn Issue/Holding: The sentencing court properly exercised discretion in denying eligibility for Earned Release, § 302.05(3), despite misperceiving at one point that defendant was statutorily ineligible: ¶17 … [A]t the December 6, 2004, [postconviction] hearing … [t]he court stated: Well, […]
Warrants – Good-faith Exception – “Significant Investigation” Requirement of Eason
State v. Bill P. Marquardt, 2005 WI 157, on certification; prior history: 2001 WI App 219 For Marquardt: John Brinckman; Patricia A. Fitzgerald Issue/Holding: The “significant investigation” requirement of State v. Eason, 2001 WI 98 is satisfied: ¶52 Investigator Price estimated that over the course of March 13 and 14, a total of 20 law enforcement officers had become […]
Search Warrants – Probable Cause – Right to Challenge Credibility of Informant
State v. Sheldon C. Stank, 2005 WI App 236 For Stank: Dennis P. Coffey Issue: Whether Stank was entitled to an evidentiary hearing, relative to the credibility of the informant, in support of his attack on probable cause for the search warrant. Holding: ¶30 We hold that Stank was not entitled to such a hearing. In Morales […]
Search Warrants – Staleness
State v. Sheldon C. Stank, 2005 WI App 236 For Stank: Dennis P. Coffey Issue: Whether a time lag of two months between the informant’s observations and the application for the search warrant rendered the warrant stale. Holding: Passage of time dose not alone render probable cause stale; the warrant-issuing court may consider various factors, ¶33 (citing State […]
Wisconsin Electronic Surveillance Control Law (WESCL), §§ 968.27-.37 – Jailhouse Call Intercept – Possibility of Attorney-Client Conversation Doesn’t Overcome Notice to Inmate of Potential for Intercept
State v. Troy Curtis Christensen, 2005 WI App 203 For Christensen: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Given proper notice that calls are subject to recording or monitoring, WESCL allows intercepts of outgoing jail calls notwithstanding the potential for capturing attorney-client calls. (State v. Deonte D. Riley, 2005 WI App 203, ¶13 n. 5, which […]
Wisconsin Electronic Surveillance Control Law (WESCL), §§ 968.27-.37 – Jailhouse Calls – One-Party Consent: Notice to Inmate of Potential for Intercept
State v. Deonte D. Riley, 2005 WI App 203 For Riley: William E. Schmaal Issue/Holding: A recorded message heard by any jail inmate placing an outgoing call, to the effect the call may be recorded, was sufficient to trigger WESCL’s one-party consent exception: ¶10 The WESCL is patterned after Title III of the federal Omnibus Control […]
§ 939.32, Attempt, Committed as PTAC Conspiracy
State v. Neil P. Jackson, 2005 WI App 104 For Jackson: Timothy A. Provis Issue/Holding: ¶7 Jackson alleges that the jury instruction on conspiracy violated his right to due process because, he contends, “conspiracy to attempt” is a nonexistent crime. Jackson relies on United States v. Meacham, 626 F.2d 503 (5th Cir. 1980), and People v. Iniguez, […]
Plain View – Generally
State v. Shaun E. Kelley, 2005 WI App 199 For Kelley: Gregory Bates Issue/Holding: ¶15 An officer has the right to access objects in plain view while searching within the scope of the consent. See State v. Johnson, 187 Wis. 2d 237, 242, 522 N.W.2d 588 (Ct. App. 1994). In order for the plain view doctrine to […]
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – Duration – Routine Traffic Offense
State v. Reginald Jones / Maurice E. O’Neal, 2005 WI App 26, (AG’s) PFR filed 2/23/05 For Jones: John P. Tedesco, SPD, Madison Appellate For O’Neal: Jess Martinez Issue/Holding: Though the facts are almost indistinguishable from those in State v. Lawrence A. Williams, 2002 WI 94, 255 Wis. 2d 1, 646 N.W.2d 834, consent to search a car immediately after conclusion of […]
Reasonable Suspicion – Stop – Basis – General
State v. Earnest Alexander, 2005 WI App 235 For Alexander: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether description of a shooting suspect as a black male wearing black skull cap, black jacket and dark pants, more than a day after the shooting permitted the stop of Alexander ten blocks east of the crime scene, wearing […]
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.