On Point

State of Wisconsin v. Gustin J. King, 2024AP2064-CRNM, 2/18/26, District II (recommended for publication) (per curiam); case activity

The COA, in the first published decision on the issue, holds that it does not have jurisdiction to review a judgment of conviction when one or more of the criminal counts is unresolved due to the existence of a deferred judgment agreement (DJA).

State of Wisconsin v. Mary E. Melstrom, 2023AP1176-CR, 2/17/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA affirmed a restitution award to cover the victim insurance company’s costs of investigating the cause of a house fire that was the subject of the defendant’s criminal charge but reversed the award for the victim’s attorney fees.

J.R.P. v. W.P.M., 2024AP1535, 2/19/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

In a rare sufficiency challenge pursued by the petitioner, COA applies a deferential standard of review and affirms.

State v. Kyle R. Appel, 2023AP2083-CR, 2/17/26, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity

Applying a standard of review exceptionally deferential to a jury’s decision to convict, COA distinguishes Appel’s proffered authority and affirms.

State v. L.Z., 2025AP2731-32, 2/17/26, District I (ineligible for publication); case activity

Although L.Z. tries to capitalize on certain statements in the court’s oral ruling as giving a foothold for her appellate challenge, the standard of review means the argument attacking a discretionary decision goes nowhere.

State v. Robert M. Christianson, 2024AP1884-CR, 2/12/26, District IV (recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)

Christianson pleaded no contest to OWI 8th after the circuit court rejected his collateral challenges to 3 prior OWI convictions. On appeal, he renews his arguments that the three convictions are invalid because he did not have legal counsel, he did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily (“KIV”) waive his right to counsel, and the court handling the case failed to find that he was competent to proceed without counsel in each case. COA concludes that Christianson made a prima facie showing that he was denied his constitutional right to counsel in all three cases, but the state met its burden to show that he nonetheless validly waived his right to counsel in 2 of the 3 cases, and the circuit court properly found that he was competent to proceed without counsel.

State v. Tate H. Batson, 2025AP136-CR, 2/12/26, District IV (ineligible for publication); case activity

Although Batson tries his best to poke holes in the judge’s discretionary decision, the deferential standard of review means those arguments uniformly fail.

Department on Aging v. J.J., 2024AP1850, 2/10/26, District I (recommended for publication); case activity

The COA held in a decision recommended for publication that the deadline for counties to file the annual review of a person subject to protective placement is directory and failing to file timely does not deprive the circuit court of competency, while reminding parties that timely annual review remains statutorily and constitutionally required.

We know it has been quite some time since we checked in with the Seventh. Mostly, that’s because the pace of the Court slowed down quite a bit toward the end of the year. We wanted to make this post more substantive, so we’ve combined the last few months into one update. As usual, we’ve tried to focus on cases with potential relevance to state court practitioners and thereby omit several interesting cases about federal procedure or federal statutory interpretation:

State of Wisconsin v. Alsherrife Mire, 2024AP2481-CR, 2/4/26, District II (recommended for publication); case activity

In a decision recommended for publication, the COA affirmed the circuit court’s order denying the defendant’s motion to suppress the fruits of his allegedly unlawfully extended traffic stop because evidence of his flight from police was not derived from the stop.