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
Impeachment — Witness’s Parole Eligibility Date
State v. Dennis E. Scott, 2000 WI App 51, 234 Wis. 2d 129, 608 N.W.2d 753 For Scott: Joseph E. Redding Issue: Whether a defense witness was properly impeached with evidence that he was serving life in prison with no prospect for parole. Holding: The witness’s attempt to admit the crimes and exonerate the defendant would have […]
Videotaped Interview, § 908.08(3) — Satisfying Requirement Child Understands “False Statements Are Punishable”
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 state sufficiently showed that the child understood that false statements were punishable so as to justify admissibility of her videotaped interview under § 908.08(3). Holding: The admissibility statute, § 908.08(3), was satisfied, […]
Rape-Shield, § 972.11 – Generally
State v. Edward A. Hammer, 2000 WI 92, 236 Wis. 2d 686, 613 N.W.2d 629, on certification, habeas denied, Hammer v. Karlen, 342 F.3d 807 (7th Cir. 2003) For Hammer: Rex Anderegg Issue/Holding: The rape shield statute will be overcome if the five-part test of State v. Pulizzano, 155 Wis. 2d 633, 656, 456 N.W.2d 325 (1990) is met. ¶44. […]
Cross-examination – in camera inspection of mental health records.
State v. Peter Ballos, 230 Wis.2d 495, 602 N.W.2d 117 (Ct. App. 1999). For Ballos: Robert N. Myeroff. Issue: Whether the trial court should have ordered production of the state’s witness’s mental health records, for in camera inspection, upon showing that the witness had been hospitalized for depression and was obsessed with bomb-building, and where […]
Defendant’s Presence — jury selection.
State v. Larry D. Harris, 229 Wis.2d 832, 601 N.W.2d 682 (Ct. App. 1999). For Harris: William S. Coleman, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate. Issue: Whether defendant’s rights to presence and counsel were violated by their absence from at least part of voir dire. Holding: Defendant has both a nonwaivable statutory right to presence, and also a […]
motion in limine, preservation of issue.
(See also Appeals, Waiver; and Evidence, Objection) State v. Charles J. Benoit, 229 Wis.2d 630, 600 N.W.2d 193 (Ct. App. 1999). For Benoit: Meredith J. Ross, LAIP. Holding: “(A) defendant who makes a motion in limine preserves the right to appeal the issue raised by the motion without renewing the motion at trial,” but only […]
Competency – Time Limits for Exam, In- vs. Out-Patient
State ex rel. Michael J. Hager v. Marten, 226 Wis.2d 687, 594 N.W.2d 791 (1999), affirming unpublished decision For Hager, Gerhardt F. Getzin, SPD, Wausau Issue: Whether the § 971.14(2) time limit, requiring completion of competency exam w/in 15 days “of the arrival of the defendant at the inpatient facility,” was violated. Holding: Resolution turns […]
Double Jeopardy – Remedy: dismissal with prejudice prior to attachment of jeopardy
State v. John P. Krueger, 224 Wis.2d 59, 588 N.W.2d 921 (1999), affirming unpublished decision For Krueger: Gary S. Cirilli Holding: The court reaffirms the holding of State v. Braunsdorf, 98 Wis.2d 569, 297 N.W.2d 808 (1980) that prior to attachment of jeopardy trial courts don’t possess the authority to dismiss a charge with prejudice except for […]
Defendant’s presence – civil proceeding.
City of Fond du Lac v. Scott R. Kaehne, 229 Wis.2d 323, 599 N.W.2d 870 (Ct. App. 1999). Holding: In civil action (here, OWI 1st), appearance of defendant may be made by letter, rather than in person, therefore time limit for demanding jury trial began running when defendant sent letter to court stating intent to […]
Defendant’s presence — dismissal of juror for cause — waiver.
State v. Audrey A. Edmunds, 229 Wis. 2d 67, 598 N.W.2d 290 (Ct. App. 1999). For Edmunds: Dean A. Strang. Holding: Edmunds is held to have waived her right to be present when the parties and the court discussed dismissal of a juror for cause. The dismissal is upheld, where the juror conveyed opinions about […]
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.