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
§ 940.19(5), Aggravated Battery — Instructions: Defining “Great Bodily Harm,” § 939.22(14)
State v. Mahlik D. Ellington, 2005 WI App 243 For Ellington: Andrea Taylor Cornwall Issue/Holding: The following instruction is sufficient: “Great bodily harm means serious bodily injury. You, the jury, are to alone to determine whether the bodily injury in your judgment is serious.” (La Barge v. State, 74 Wis. 2d 327, 333, 246 N.W.2d 794, 797 […]
§ 940.22(2) (2001-02): Sexual Exploitation by Therapist – Elements, Generally – Ongoing Therapist-Patient Relationship
State v. Michael A. DeLain, 2005 WI 52, affirming, as modified, 2004 WI App 79 For DeLain: Robert R. Henak Issue/Holding: ¶9 To obtain a conviction for a violation of Wis. Stat. § 940.22(2), the State must prove three elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that the defendant was or held himself or herself out to […]
Obstructing, § 946.41 – Exculpatory Denial Exception Doesn’t Extend to False Accusation of Others
State v. Brent R. Reed, 2005 WI 53, affirming as modified 2004 WI App 98, and overruling State v. Joseph M. Espinoza, 2002 WI App 51 For Reed: David H. Weber Issue/Holding: ¶21 … Wisconsin JI——Criminal 1766A (2003) accurately sets forth the elements of obstructing an officer based on giving false information to police as follows: 1. The defendant knowingly […]
§ 947.01, Disorderly Conduct – Interference with Right to Protest in Public Place
Ralph Ovadal v. City of Madison, 416 F.3d 351 (7th Cir 2005) Issue/Holding: Use of disorderly conduct to Overdal’s peaceful protest (displaying large signs on Beltline pedestrian overpass) was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to him; however, remand required to determine whether the ban was content neutral and narrowly tailored.
§ 948.03(2)(b) (2001-02), Harm to Child – Elements, Proof
State v. Kimberly B., 2005 WI App 115 For Kimberly B.: Anthony G. Milisauskas Issue/Holding: “¶22 … The crime of physical abuse of a child, as applied to the matter at hand, requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the following three elements: (1) Kimberly caused bodily harm to Jasmine, (2) Kimberly intentionally caused such […]
§ 948.21(1), Neglect, Causing Death – Element of “Person Responsible for Child’s Welfare,” § 948.01(3)
State v. Marketta A. Hughes, 2005 WI App 155, PFR filed For Hughes: John T. Wasielewski Issue/Holding: ¶16 We conclude that the plain language of the statute makes clear that a seventeen-year-old employed by a parent to care for the parent’s child can be a person responsible for the welfare of the child. The record […]
Crimes: § 948.22(2) (2001-02), Non-Support – Elements – “Court of Competent Jurisdiction”
State v. Thomas Scott Bailey Smith, Sr., 2005 WI 104, reversing 2004 WI App 116 For Smith: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding1: ¶15 Here, too, we examine the statute providing for the crime, Wis. Stat. § 948.22(2), to determine the elements of the crime of failure to pay child support, and we focus on […]
§ 948.22(2) (2001-02), Non-Support – “Court of Competent Jurisdiction” – Claim Preclusion
State v. Thomas Scott Bailey Smith, Sr., 2005 WI 104, reversing 2004 WI App 116 For Smith: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Smith’s unsuccessful prior challenge to the court support order bars him, under principles of claim preclusion, from challenging the validity of the order in the present non-support prosecution, ¶¶21-23. The court […]
Community Caretaker Exception to Warrant Requirement – Entry of Residence to Check on Occupant
State v. George Toland Ziedonis, 2005 WI App 249 For Ziedonis: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: Police, responding to a “loose animal” complaint became sufficiently alarmed by the possibility the dogs’ owner was in need of assistance that their warrantless entry was justified under the community caretaker doctrine: ¶27 Like in Ferguson, the police “utilized alternative […]
Community Caretaker Exception to Warrant Requirement – Generally
State v. George Toland Ziedonis, 2005 WI App 249 For Ziedonis: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶14 One such exception is the community caretaker function, which arises when the actions of the police are “totally divorced from the detection, investigation, or acquisition of evidence relating to the violation of a criminal statute.” State v. Anderson, […]
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.