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
§ 940.225(2)(a), Second-Degree Sexual Assault – Sufficiency of Evidence – Timing of Force Element
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/Holding: ¶64. We agree with the court of appeals that M.M.’s testimony did not follow a chronological order. A reasonable factfinder could, however, draw the inference that the defendant verbally […]
Bail Jumping, § 946.49(1)(b) – Generally
State v. Daniel Wyatt Henning, 2004 WI 89 For Henning: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶39. In Wisconsin, bail jumping and the crime underlying a bail jumping charge are distinct and separate offenses for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause. State ex rel. Jacobus v. State, 208 Wis. 2d 39, 53, 559 N.W.2d 900 (1997) (citing State v. Harris, […]
Sexual Assault, § 948.02(2) — Defense of Deceitfully Misleading Defendant as to Minor’s Age
State v. Todd M. Jadowski, 2004 WI 68, on certification For Jadowski: Richard Hahn Issue: Whether a minor sexual assault complainant’s intentional misrepresentation of his or her age supports an affirmative defense to § 948.02(2) sexual assault. Holding: ¶19. The defendant acknowledges that Wis. Stat. §§ 948.02(2), 939.23, and 939.43(2) prohibit an actor from raising […]
Guilty Pleas – Post-Sentencing Plea Withdrawal: Suppression of Material Exculpatory Impeachment Evidence – Statutory Basis
State v. Kevin Harris, 2004 WI 64, affirming as modified 2003 WI App 144, 266 Wis. 2d 200, 667 N.W.2d 813 For Harris: Steven A. Koch Issue/Holding: ¶34 We recognize that in the constitutional context, the Brady requirement of materiality is dependent upon whether the suppressed evidence undermines confidence in the outcome of the trial […]
Hearsay – Against-Penal Interest Statement Exculpating Defendant, § 908.045(4)
State v. Joseph J. Guerard, 2004 WI 85, reversing unpublished decision of court of appeals For Guerard: Joseph L. Sommers Issue/Holding: ¶23. The central issue in this case is the extent of corroboration required under Wis. Stat. § 908.045(4) for statements tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused. We addressed this […]
Legislative Privilege, § 13.96 – “Confidential” Distinguished from “Privileged”
Custodian of Records for Legislative Technology Services Bureau v. State, 2004 WI 65, reconsideration denied, 2004 WI 149 Issue/Holding: ¶11 Wahl contends that Wis. Stat. § 13.96, as it interacts with Wis. Stat. § 905.01, creates a statutory privilege that, while not expressly stated, is implicit in LTSB’s obligation to treat all information within its possession as […]
Supervisory writs generally
State ex rel Ralph A. Kalal v. Circuit Court for Dane County, 2004 WI 58 For Kalal: Waring R. Fincke Issue/Holding: ¶17 A “writ of supervision is not a substitute for an appeal.” State ex rel. Dressler v. Circuit Court for Racine County, 163 Wis. 2d 622, 630, 472 N.W.2d 532 (Ct. App. 1991). The […]
SVP – Postdisposition: Supervised Release – Procedure – Appointment of Expert for Subject, §§ 980.08(3)-(4)
State v. Dennis Thiel, 2004 WI App 225 For Thiel: Suzanne L. Hagopian, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue1: Whether the court must appoint an examiner for the subject under § 980.08(3) when it has already appointed one under § 980.08(4). Holding: ¶17. The parties agree that the language of Wis. Stat. § 980.08(3) requires the circuit […]
Grounds — Denial of Physical Placement: § 48.356(2) Warnings in Underlying Order Unnecessary
Kimberly S.S. v. Sebastian X.L., 2004 WI App 83 Issue: Whether § 48.415(4) requires proof that an underlying family court order denying physical placement contained the warnings required by § 48.356(2). Holding: ¶7. The plain language of Wis. Stat. § 48.415(4) requires proof that the notices in Wis. Stat. § 48.356(2) were provided only when the underlying […]
Counsel – Ineffective Assistance – Deficient Performance: Presentation/Examination of Witnesses – Impeachment
State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: “Second, Arredondo claims that his trial attorney failed to impeach Garza’s testimony with false statements Garza made to the police. This claim fails on both the deficiency and prejudice prongs. Arredondo cannot show prejudice because Garza admitted on direct-examination that […]
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.