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
Appellate Procedure: Finality of Order — Subsequent Order Superceding Prior Order
State v. Patrick E. Richter, 2000 WI 58, 235 Wis. 2d 524, 612 N.W.2d 29, reversing 224 Wis. 2d 814, 592 N.W.2d 310 (Ct. App. 1999) For Richter: Susan Alesia, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the second of two competing orders granting a suppression motion superceded the first, so as to make the state’s notice […]
Notice of Appeal – Indigency Filing – by Fax
State v. Ronald G. Sorenson, 2000 WI 43, 234 Wis. 2d 648, 611 N.W.2d 240, reversing unpublished decision of court of appeals Issue: “(W)hether Wis. Stat. § 801.16(2), under which ‘papers that do not require a filing fee’ may be filed by facsimile transmission, permits indigent parties to file a notice of appeal by facsimile.” […]
Sentence Credit – Home Detention
State v. Paul E. Magnuson, 2000 WI 19, 233 Wis. 2d 40, 606 N.W.2d 536, reversing unpublished decision For Magnuson: Keith A. Findley, UW Law School Issue: Whether a defendant is entitled to sentence credit for time spent in home detention with electronic monitoring as a condition of bond. Holding: Custody for sentence credit purposes is […]
Closing Argument — Failure to Move for Mistrial
State v. Dale H. Davidson, 2000 WI 91, 236 Wis. 2d 537, 613 N.W.2d 606, reversing State v. Davidson, 222 Wis. 2d 233, 589 N.W.2d 038 For Davidson: Jerome F. Buting & Pamela Moorshead Issue: Whether objection to the prosecutor’s closing argument was waived by failing to move for mistrial. Holding: Although Davidson objected to […]
Restitution — Limitations — Federal ERISA Preemption — pension fund assets
State v. David W. Oakley, 2000 WI 37, 234 Wis. 2d 528, 609 N.W.2d 786, reversing State v. Oakley, 226 Wis. 2d 437, 594 N.W.2d 827 (Ct. App. 1999) For Oakley: Timothy T. Kay Issue: “(W)hether a circuit court may require payment of an old, unpaid fine that was imposed in a prior sentence as a condition […]
Sentencing – Review – Articulation of Primary Factors in Setting PED
State v. David S. Leighton, 2000 WI App 156, 237 Wis.2d 709, 616 N.W.2d 126 For Leighton: Daniel Snyder Issue/Holding: In setting parole eligibility date trial court need not separately refer to primary factors used in imposing sentence. ¶¶52-53.
Double Jeopardy – Multiplicity: Child Enticement – Single Act
State v. William J. Church, 2000 WI 90, 223 Wis. 2d 641, 589 N.W.2d 638, dismissing review as improvidently granted, thereby affirming State v. Church , 223 Wis. 2d 641, 589 N.W.2d 638 (Ct. App. 1998) For Church: James L. Fullin, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the child enticement statute, § 948.07, supports multiple charges and punishments based […]
Enhancer – Construction – Prior Conviction Presumptively Elemental
State v. Jeffrey A. Warbelton, 2009 WI 6, affirming 2008 WI App 42 For Warbelton: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶21 …. The legislature has the authority to designate a prior conviction as a penalty enhancer rather than an element of the offense. Almendarez-Torres, 523 U.S. at 246. Although the legislature is permitted to designate a […]
Reasonable Suspicion – Frisk – Minor Traffic Violation
State v. Jose C. McGill, 2000 WI 38, 234 Wis. 2d 560, 609 N.W.2d 795, affirming unpublished decision For McGill: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to believe McGill armed and dangerous, and therefore to frisk him, following a routine traffic stop. Holding: Judged by the requisite objective test, the […]
Warrants – Good-faith Exception – Reliance on Judge-made Law
State v. Lance R. Ward, 2000 WI 3, 231 Wis.2d 723, 604 N.W.2d 517, reversing State v. Ward, 222 Wis. 2d 311, 588 N.W.2d 645.For Ward: Daniel P. Dunn Issue: Whether the exclusionary rule applies where the police relied on judge-made law that automatically countenanced all no-knock entries to search for drugs and that law […]
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.