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
Jury – Selection – Bias / Disqualification — Doubtful Fairness: Equivocal Statement — Deference to Trial Court Finding
State v. James H. Oswald, 2000 WI App 3, 232 Wis.2d 103, 606 N.W.2d 238 For Oswald: James L. Fullin, Jr., SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether an equivocal declaration of impartiality by a prospective juror is enough to establish subjective bias, given a trial court’s finding to the contrary. Holding: The issue of a prospective juror’s subjective […]
Jury – Selection – Bias / Disqualification – Doubtful Fairness: Belief Police More Credible
State v. Scot A. Czarnecki, 2000 WI App 155, 237 Wis.2d 794, 615 N.W.2d 672 For Czarnecki: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the trial court should have granted the defense motion to remove a prospective juror who acknowledged believing that police officers would be more credible than other witnesses. Holding: Juror bias is reviewed […]
Jury – Selection – Bias / Disqualification – Doubtful Fairness: Equivocal Statement
State v. Nathaniel A. Lindell, 2000 WI App 180, 238 Wis.2d 422, 617 N.W.2d 500, affirmed on other grounds, State v. Nathaniel A. Lindell, 2001 WI 108 For Lindell: Russell L. Hanson; Timothy J. Gaskell Issue: Whether the prospective juror’s allowing, “I think I could” make a fair determination, established subjective bias. Holding: The trial court’s ruling of no […]
Jury – Selection – Bias / Disqualification — Doubtful Fairness, Generally: Defer to Trial Court — Need for Precise Questioning
State v. Marquis O. Gilliam, 2000 WI App 152, 238 Wis.2d 1, 615 N.W.2d 660 For Gilliam: Robert B. Rondini Issue: Whether the trial court’s denial of a motion to remove a juror based on subjective bias was clearly erroneous. Holding: The issue of a juror’s subjective bias is reviewed deferentially to the trial court’s resolution. Though […]
Jury – Selection – Bias / Disqualification — Doubtful Fairness: Equivocal Statement — Deference to Trial Court Finding
State v. Jimmie R.R., 2000 WI App 5, 232 Wis.2d 138, 606 N.W.2d 196 For Jimmie R.R.: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the trial court erred in refusing to strike for cause a potential juror who was equivocal on his ability to be fair. Holding: The trial court did not err in finding no […]
Jury – Selection – Bias / Disqualification – Doubtful Fairness: Predetermined Guilt – Trial Court Obligation to Conduct Hearing
State v. Theodore Oswald, 2000 WI App 2, 232 Wis.2d 62, 606 N.W.2d 207 For Oswald: Jerome F. Buting, Kathleen B. Stilling Issue: Whether prospective jurors’ expressions of predetermined guilt established either objective or subjective bias. Holding: Applying a mixed standard of review, the court discerns no bias, in that the strength of these opinions changed during […]
Miranda Waiver, Deaf Suspect
State v. George W. Hindsley, 2000 WI App 130, 237 Wis. 2d 358, 614 N.W.2d 48 For Hindsley: James B. Connell Issue: Whether a deaf suspect, fluent in ASL but with limited proficiency in English, validly waived his Miranda rights, when those rights were explained to him in English-based (“transliteration”) signing. Holding: When the suspect […]
Miranda – Good-Faith Exception
State v. George W. Hindsley, 2000 WI App 130, 237 Wis. 2d 358, 614 N.W.2d 48 For Hindsley: James B. Connell Issue: Whether a good-faith exception to Miranda should be recognized. Holding: The court of appeals doesn’t have authority to articulate a good-faith exception to Miranda: “(It) is not the proper role of this court to create […]
Statements – Voluntariness – Prolonged Detention
State v. James H. Oswald, 2000 WI App 3, 232 Wis.2d 103, 606 N.W.2d 238 For Oswald: James L. Fullin, Jr., SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether a statement made while hospitalized should have been suppressed, as the product of a lengthy detention for the purpose of interrogation. Holding: ¶46 When a […]
Statements – Voluntariness – Absence of Police Coercion
State v. George W. Hindsley, 2000 WI App 130, 237 Wis. 2d 358, 614 N.W.2d 48 For Hindsley: James B. Connell Issue: Whether a statement is involuntary, even in the absence of police coercion, simply because the Miranda warnings aren’t effectively communicated. Holding: A suspect’s deafness doesn’t alter the test for voluntariness, “which was and […]
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.