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
Costs — Order to Produce
State v. Tronnie M. Dismuke, 2001 WI 75, 244 Wis. 2d 457, 628 N.W.2d 791, reversing and remanding, 2000 WI App 198, 238 Wis. 2d 577, 617 N.W.2d 862 For Dismuke: Richard D. Martin, William S. Coleman, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate< Issue: Whether a defendant may have to bear costs of being produced from prison for court appearances. […]
Suppression Hearing – Riverside Hearing – Factual Misrepresentation
State v. Eddie McAttee, 2001 WI App 262 For McAttee: Russell D. Bohach Issue: Whether the Riverside probable cause finding was tainted by a factual misrepresentation (specifically, that McAttee had been implicated by a “coconspirator”) in the police report submitted in support of continued detention. Holding: Though describing the informant as a coconspirator “may have been legally […]
Challenge Incarceration Program (“Boot Camp”) – §§ 973.01(3m), 302.045
State v. Ashley B. Steele, 2001 WI App 160, PFR filed 6/25/01 For Steele: Christopher William Rose Issue: Whether sentencing eligibility for “boot camp” is determined by bright-line statutory guidelines, or by exercise of trial court discretion. Holding: ¶12. While an offender must meet the eligibility requirements of Wis. Stat. § 302.045(2) to participate in the challenge […]
Warrants – Good-Faith Exception – Remand for Determination
State v. Bill Paul Marquardt, 2001 WI App 219, PFR filed 9/20/01 For Marquardt: James B. Connell Issue: Whether evidence seized under a warrant defective because unsupported by probable cause may be admissible under the good-faith doctrine. Holding: Given that, subsequent to trial-level litigation, the supreme court recognized the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule, in State v. […]
Warrants – Probable Cause
State v. Bill Paul Marquardt, 2001 WI App 219, PFR filed 9/20/01 For Marquardt: James B. Connell Issue: Whether the search warrant was supported by probable cause. Holding: ¶18. …. The State points to several facts in the affidavits: (1) Mary’s telephone was off the hook the day she was killed, suggesting “that the perpetrator had […]
Warrants – Failure to Make Contemporaneous Record of Telephonic Application – Reconstruction of Application
State v. Cherise A. Raflick, 2001 WI 129 For Raflik: Michael J. Fitzgerald, Dean A. Strang Issue/Holding: ¶1. This case requires us to decide whether suppression is the proper remedy when a telephonic application for a search warrant is not recorded in accordance with Wis. Stat. § 968.12(3)(d)1, and when the factual basis for the […]
Right to be Present – Trial Court Communication with Jury
State v. William Koller, 2001 WI App 253, PFR filed For Koller: Peter M. Koneazny, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue: Whether the trial court’s response to a jury request to see a written report and a transcript of a witness’s testimony — that these items were “not available” — without first seeking defense input was error. Holding: The […]
First Amendment – Speech – Criminalized Threat
State v. Murle E. Perkins, 2001 WI 46, 243 Wis. 2d 141, 626 N.W.2d 762, reversing 2000 WI App 137, 237 Wis. 2d 313, 614 N.W.2d 25 For Perkins: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether and to what extent threats are protected from prosecution under the first amendment. Holding: ¶17 This court agrees with the […]
Right to Be Present – Voir Dire
State v. George S. Tulley, 2001 WI App 236 For Tulley: Patrick M. Donnelly Issue: Whether excluding defendant and his attorney from in camera voir dire of several jurors was reversible error. Holding: A defendant has both constitutional and statutory rights to be present, with assistance of counsel, at voir dire, and the trial court therefore erred […]
Expectation of Privacy — Property or Possessory Interest Necessary
State v. Derrick Benton, 2001 WI App 81 For Benton: James Kachelski. Issue: Whether the defendant can challenge seizure of property from an auto where he claimed no ownership or possessory interest in either the auto or the seized property. Holding: ¶11 Although the trial court upheld the search of the car in which Benton was […]
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.