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
Waiver of Issue – Invited Error – Defect in Deferred Prosecution Agreement
State v. Rex E. Wollenberg, 2004 WI App 20, PFR filed 1/8/04 For Wollenberg: Susan E. Alesia, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶12. Second, assuming this was a DPA, Wollenberg claims the judgment is void because the agreement was never in writing. Wollenberg, however, invited the error he alleges, and we normally will not review invited […]
Waiver of Objection to DA’s Consultation with Witness during Break
State v. Gregg A. Pfaff, 2004 WI App 31 For Pfaff: Rex Anderegg Issue/Holding: Failure to request order barring on prosecutor’s conferring with particular witness during break in testimony waived right to challenge such consultation, notwithstanding similar order with respect to different witness, and general sequestration order. ¶¶38-41.
Failure to Object to Plea Bargain Breach
State v. Brian W. Sprang:, 2004 WI App 121 For Sprang: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶13 Before addressing Sprang’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, we must first address whether there was, in fact, a material and substantial breach of the plea agreement. State v. Naydihor, 2004 WI 43, ¶9, ___ Wis. […]
Restitution — Defenses — Set-Off
State v. Tony G. Longmire, 2004 WI App 90 For Longmire: Charles B. Vetzner, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the defendant was entitled to set-off as a defense to restitution for theft by (home improvement) contractor, for work that was paid for by the contractor to a subcontractor. Holding: ¶18. We conclude that the trial court […]
Waiver of Issue: Multiplicity
State v. Edward Leon Jackson, 2004 WI App 190, PFR filed 10/15/04 For Jackson: Meredith J. Ross, LAIP, UW Law School Issue/Holding: ¶4 The State, relying on State v. Kohler, 2001 WI App 253, 248 Wis. 2d 259, 635 N.W.2d 838, argues that because Jackson did not raise a multiplicity challenge at trial, he has […]
Serial Litigation Bar (Escalona-Naranjo): Applicable to SVP Commitments
State v. Thomas H. Bush (II), 2004 WI App 193, reversed in part, 2005 WI 103 For Bush: Robert G. LeBell Issue: Whether Bush, on appeal from denial of petition for release from SVP commitment, § 980.09(2), is procedurally barred from challenging the constitutionality of his underlying commitment because he could have raised such challenge […]
Standards of Review: Administrative Decision – Certiorari: Dismissal of Petition on Procedural Grounds
State ex rel Kim J. Barksdale v. Litscher, 2004 WI App 130 Issue/Holding: ¶7. Generally, on an appeal of the circuit court’s order granting or denying relief in a certiorari action, we review the underlying decision of the administrative agency, not that of the circuit court. See State ex rel. Sprewell v. McCaughtry, 226 Wis. 2d 389, 393, […]
Standards of Review: Administrative Decision – Certiorari: Motion to Quash
State ex rel. David C. Myers v. Swenson, 2004 WI App 224, PFR filed 11/24/04 For Myers: Christopher T. Sundberg; Bruce D. Huibregtse Issue/Holding: ¶6. A motion to quash a writ of certiorari is akin to a motion to dismiss. Fee v. Board of Review, 2003 WI App 17, ¶7, 259 Wis. 2d 868, 657 N.W.2d 112. […]
Standards of Review: Administrative Decision – Certiorari
State ex rel. Raymond Booker v. Schwarz, 2004 WI App 50 For Booker: John Pray, Legal Assistance Program, UW Law School Issue/Holding: ¶10 We review the decision of the agency, not that of the circuit court. State ex rel. Warren v. Schwarz, 211 Wis. 2d 710, 717, 566 N.W.2d 173 (Ct. App. 1997), aff’d, 219 Wis. 2d 615, […]
Binding Authority – Conflicting State and U.S. Supreme Court Cases
State v. Walter Leutenegger, 2004 WI App 127 For Leutenegger: Bill Ginsberg Issue/Holding: “[The court of appeals is] bound by the most recent pronouncements of the Wisconsin Supreme Court,” ¶5, quoting Jones v. Dane County, 195 Wis. 2d 892, 918 n.8, 537 N.W.2d 74 (Ct. App. 1995). And, ¶10, utilizing same quote: “Therefore, we applyRichter because it is the most […]
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.