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
Double Jeopardy: “Manifest Necessity” for Mistrial Where “Counsel Aired Improper and Highly Prejudicial Evidence Before Jury”
State v. Clyde Baily Williams, 2004 WI App 56, federal habeas denied, Williams v. Bartow, 481 F.3d 492 (7th Cir 2007) For Williams: Margaret A. Maroney, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶22. We begin by addressing Williams’ double jeopardy claim. He submits that the trial court failed to exercise “sound discretion” in declaring a mistrial after his counsel […]
Double Jeopardy – Remedy: Partial Acquittal on Multi-Count Trial
State v. Daniel Wyatt Henning, 2004 WI 89, reversing 2003 WI App 54, 261 Wis. 2d. 664, 660 N.W.2d 698 For Henning: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: “¶41. Thus, the critical question is this: When a jury, in a multicount trial, both convicts and acquits, and an appellate court then overturns the conviction or convictions, do […]
Due Process – Exculpatory Evidence – Deferred-Judgment Probationary Status, Prosecutorial Duty to Disclose, § 971.23(1)(f)
State v. Richard G. White, 2004 WI App 78, (AG’s) PFR filed 4/1/04 For White: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: ¶23. Under Wis. Stat. § 971.23(1)(f), a prosecutor must, upon request, disclose to the defense “[t]he criminal record of a prosecution witness which is known to the district attorney.” A prosecutor, however, has an affirmative duty to make […]
Due Process – Exculpatory Evidence – Generally
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: ¶12 In Brady, the United States Supreme Court held that “the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process where the evidence is material […]
Enhancer — TIS-I – Calculation (Unclassified Felony)
State v. Michael D. Jackson, 2004 WI 29, affirming unpublished decision of court of appeals For Jackson: Joseph E. Schubert Issue/Holding: ¶42 Applying the rule of lenity, we conclude that Wis. Stat. § 973.01(2)(b)6 should be read together with Wis. Stat. § 973.01(2)(c) in calculation of the maximum term of confinement for unclassified felonies with penalty enhancers under TIS-I. We apply the […]
Enhancers, § 939.62(2m)(b)2 – Not Cruel and Unusual Punishment
State v. Michael D. Lewis, 2004 WI App 211 For Lewis: Timothy A. Provis Issue/Holding: Sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole, as persistent repeater due to prior conviction for sexual assault of a child, on a current conviction for child enticement isn’t cruel / unusual punishment under the 8th amendment. ¶¶16-18.
DNA Collection, § 973.047, and Surcharge, § 973.046 — Prior Collection
State v. Franciollo L. Jones, 2004 WI App 212, PFR filed 11/11/04 For Jones: Syovata Edari; Ellen Henak (on PFR), SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue: Whether the trial court properly ordered Jones to pay a DNA surcharge even though he had already provided a DNA sample in an earlier case. Holding: ¶5 WISCONSIN STAT. § 973.047 obligates the […]
Due Process – Judicial Intervention in Presentation of Case
State v. Johnnie Carprue, 2004 WI 111, reversing 2003 WI App 148 For Carprue: Stephanie G. Rapkin Issue/Holding: ¶58. Carprue contends that he was denied his due process right to a fair trial because Judge Schellinger was not impartial. His evidence consists of the judge’s actions in calling and questioning Morrow and in questioning Carprue.¶59. “A fair […]
Due Process – Defendant’s Right to Testify – Waiver
State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue:Whether the defendant’s explicit waiver of his right to testify was conditional (on the outcome of two defense witnesses) such that another colloquy should have been conducted; or, if the waiver is deemed binding, whether the trial court nonetheless erroneously […]
Enhancer — § 940.03, Felony-Murder (1999-2000)
State v. Brandon L. Mason, 2004 WI App 176 For Dawson: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: The felony murder statute, § 940.03 (1999-2000), contains characteristics suggestive of both penalty enhancers (it adds a specified term to the maximum penalty applicable to the underlying crime), ¶15, and also substantive offenses (it is located in a chapter […]
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.