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
Introducing Evidence Doesn’t Waive Challenge to Admissibility Where Trial Court Ruled Evidence Admissible on Motion In Limine
State v. Gary M.B., 2004 WI 33, affirming 2003 WI App 72, 261 Wis. 2d 811, 661 N.W.2d 435 For Gary M.B.: T. Christopher Kelly Issue: Whether defendant’s introduction of his/ her prior criminal record, after objection to its admissibility was overruled, waived the objection. Holding: ¶11. Under the doctrine of strategic waiver, also known […]
Generally, § 973.155 — “Custody” and “Escape”
State ex rel. Michael J. Thorson v. Schwarz, 2004 WI 96, reconsideration denied, 2004 WI 133, affirming unpublished decision of court of appeals For Thorson: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶16. The term “custody” is not defined in Wis. Stat. § 973.155. To fill this void, Wisconsin courts have relied upon the definition set forth in Wis. […]
Waiver of Issue: Judicial Intervention, § 906.14
State v. Johnnie Carprue, 2004 WI 111, reversing 2003 WI App 148, 266 Wis. 2d 168, 667 N.W.2d 800 For Carprue: Stephanie G. Rapkin Issue/Holding: ¶34 Subsection (3) of § 906.14 authorizes objections, and it “defers the requirement of a timely objection . . . to the next available opportunity when the jury is not […]
Issue-Preservation: Sufficiency of Evidence – Trial-Level Challenge Unnecessary
State v. Obea S. Hayes, 2004 WI 80, affirming 2003 WI App 99, 264 Wis. 2d 377, 663 N.W.2d 351 For Hayes: Philip J. Brehm Issue: Whether challenge to sufficiency of evidence must be raised during trial in order to preserve the right to raise the challenge on appeal. Holding: State v. Gomez, 179 Wis. […]
Appellate Procedure – Review of Discretion Based on Mistaken View of Law
State v. Cesar G., 2004 WI 61, reversing unpublished opinion For Cesar G.: Eileen Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶46. In contrast to the court of appeals, we view the circuit court’s statement that it was not convinced it had the statutory authority to stay the sex registration requirement as persuasive that it made its decision based […]
Review: Administrative Rule
WCCD v. DNR, 2004 WI 40, affirming 2003 WI App 76, 263 Wis. 2d 370, 661 N.W.2d 858 Issue/Holding: ¶5. The central issue in this case is the validity of § NR 10.01(1)(h).5 A court may declare an administrative rule invalid “if it finds that it violates constitutional provisions or exceeds the statutory authority of the agency or was […]
Standards of Review: Administrative Decisions – Certiorari – Revocation of Probation – Right to Counsel
State ex rel. Peter D. Griffin v. Smith / State ex rel. Micah E. Glenn v. Litscher, 2004 WI 36, on certification For Griffin and Glenn: Nathaniel Cade, Jr., State Bar Pro Bono Project Issue/Holding: A new rule of equitable tolling for untimely certiorari petitions seeking review of revocation decisions is subject to the retroactivity analysis adopted by State […]
Presentence Report — Defense-Prepared — Confidential Character of Defendant’s Statements
State v. Thomas A. Greve, 2004 WI 69, on certification For Greve: Jeffrey J. De La Rosa Issue: Whether State v. Crowell, 149 Wis. 2d 859, 440 N.W.2d 352 (1989), construing Wis. Stat. § 972.15 as limiting the use of a court-ordered presentence investigation report (PSI) to postconviction settings, also applies to a defendant’s sentencing memorandum. Holding: ¶17. The confidentiality […]
Presentence Report — Enhanced Need for, under TIS
State v. Curtis E. Gallion, 2004 WI 42, affirming 2002 WI App 265 For Gallion: Randall E. Paulson, SPD, Milwaukee App Amici: Robert R. Henak, WACDL; Walter J. Dickey, et al., UW Law School Issue/Holding: ¶31. Likewise, we agree with the Criminal Penalties Study Committee that the judiciary must address the increased responsibility placed upon the sentencing […]
Sentence Modification — New Factor — TIS-I: Elimination of Parole
State v. James D. Crochiere, 2004 WI 78, affirming unpublished opinion For Crochiere: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether post-sentencing events such as rehabilitation which would not be considered “new factors” supporting reduction of indeterminate sentence may be regarded as new factors under the determinate regime of TIS-I. Holding: ¶9. Crochiere bases his argument […]
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.