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
Privilege – Confidential Informant, § 905.10(3)(b) – Test for Disclosure
State v. Phonesavanh Vanmanivong, 2003 WI 41, reversing, 2001 WI App 299 For Vanmanivong: John J. Grau Issue/Holding: The test for disclosing an informant’s identity under § 905.10(3)(b) is found in the concurrence to State v. Outlaw, 108 Wis. 2d 112, 321 N.W.2d 145 (1982): ¶24. We now reaffirm our holding in Dowe that the concurrence in Outlaw states the test […]
Attorney-client Communications, § 905.03 – Waiver by Counsel’s Voluntary but Mistaken Disclosure
Sampson v. Sampson, 2004 WI 57, reversing 2003 WI App 141, 265 Wis. 2d 803, 667 N.W.2d 831 Issue: “¶2 The question before this court is whether a lawyer’s voluntary production of documents in response to opposing counsel’s discovery request constitutes a waiver of the attorney-client privilege under Wis. Stat. § (Rule) 905.11 when the lawyer does not […]
Privilege – § 905.13, Comment on Silence
State v. John S. Cooper, 2003 WI App 227, PFR filed 11/14/03 For Cooper: John A. Birdsall Issue/Holding: ¶19. The test for determining if there has been an impermissible comment on a defendant’s right to remain silent is whether the language used was manifestly intended or was of such character that the jury would naturally […]
Plea Bargains – Breach: By Prosecutor – Pressuring PSI Agent to Change Favorable Recommendation Where State Had Agreed to Make No Recommendation
State v. Joshua L. Howland, 2003 WI App 104 For Howland: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶37. We conclude that the district attorney’s contacts with the Department of Probation and Parole, complaining about the PSI author’s sentence recommendation, when the plea agreement required the State to make no sentence recommendation, resulted in a […]
Guilty Pleas – Required Knowledge — Elements — 2nd-Degree Sexual Assault (by Contact), § 948.02(2) — “Knowing Contact” Insufficient
State v. John A. Jipson, 2003 WI App 222 For Jipson: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: On a charge of 2nd-degree sexual assault, § 948.02(2), the guilty plea court must ascertain the defendant’s knowledge of the element of intent, namely that the defendant had sexual contact for the purpose of sexual degradation, humiliation, arousal, […]
Guilty Pleas – Required Knowledge — Elements — Referenced Document not Attached to Plea Questionnaire
State v. Richard A. Lange, 2003 WI App 2 For Lange: Daniel F. Snyder Issue/Holding: Where the plea form made reference to an “attached sheet” which was not in fact attached, and the trial court did not go over the elements with the defendant, “the record is barren as to any explanation or detailing to Lange […]
Guilty Pleas – Required Knowledge — Rights
State v. Richard A. Lange, 2003 WI App 2 For Lange: Daniel F. Snyder Issue/Holding: Trial court’s colloquy sufficiently established defendant’s understanding of rights waived by guilty plea. ¶¶23-27.
Guilty Pleas – Plea Bargains – Breach: By Prosecutor – Sentencing Recommendation by Police Officer Exceeding Bargained Length
State v. Leonard C. Matson, 2003 WI App 253 For Matson: Michael Yovovich, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶13. Matson argues his due process rights were violated when Alstadt, the investigating detective in this case, gave a sentencing recommendation that undermined the State’s recommendation, in effect, breaching the plea agreement. The State counters that Alstadt was […]
Guilty Pleas – Plea Bargains – Breach: By Prosecutor — Remedy
State v. Leonard C. Matson, 2003 WI App 253 For Matson: Michael Yovovich, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶33. Here, as he did before the circuit court, Matson seeks not to withdraw his plea, which is one remedy for a breach of a plea agreement. Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 263 (1971). Matson instead […]
Plea Bargains — Breach: By Defendant – Challenging Prior Enhancer-Conviction
State v. Robert C. Deilke, 2004 WI 104, reversing 2003 WI App 151, 266 Wis. 2d 274, 667 N.W.2d 867 For Deilke: Kelly J. McKnight Issue: Whether a defendant’s successful challenge to a prior plea-bargain based conviction that is being used as an enhancer in a current proceeding amounts to a breach of that prior […]
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.