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
Binding Authority — Retroactivity — Statute Declared Unconstitutional
State v. Paul R. Benzel, 220 Wis. 2d 588, 583 N.W.2d 434 (Ct. App. 1998) Pro se Issue/Holding: The holding of State v. Hall, 207 Wis.2d 54, 557 N.W.2d 778 (1997), that the drug tax, § 139.95, is unconstitutional applies retroactively: “failure to do so leads to the untenable result that a person stands convicted for […]
Presentence Report — Use / Challenge to Factual Accuracy
State v. Wayne R. Anderson, 222 Wis. 2d 403, 588 N.W.2d 75 (Ct. App. 1998) For Anderson: Margaret A. Maroney, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: A PSI represents an important source of guidance for a trial court in a sentencing proceeding. A sentencing constitutes a critical phase of a criminal proceeding. And, in a case involving […]
NGI — Conditional Release Trial — Jury Instruction on Dangerousness
State v. Alan Adin Randall, 222 Wis. 2d 53, 586 N.W.2d 318 (Ct. App. 1998) For Randall: Waring Fincke Issue/Holding: The trial court properly rejected requested instruction that the State must prove “a level of present danger which cannot be managed safely in the community under any set of reasonable conditions,” and instead properly gave an […]
NGI — Conditional Release Trial — Jury Instruction on Medical Justification / Substantive Due Process
State v. Alan Adin Randall, 222 Wis. 2d 53, 586 N.W.2d 318 (Ct. App. 1998) For Randall: Waring Fincke Issue/Holding: Randall proposed to ask the jury, “Is there any medical justification for the Petitioner’s continued confinement at the Winnebago Mental Health Institute or any other in-patient mental health facility?” The trial court, holding that the […]
NGI — Conditional Release Trial — Sufficiency of Evidence on Dangerousness
State v. Alan Adin Randall, 222 Wis. 2d 53, 586 N.W.2d 318 (Ct. App. 1998) For Randall: Waring Fincke Issue/Holding: Evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict that Randall not be released, based largely on the cicrcumstances of his crime.
Sentence Modification: Judicial Estoppel Bar — Agreement to Recommended Sentence
Scott A. Magnuson, 220 Wis. 2d 468, 583 N.W.2d 843 (Ct. App. 1998) For Magnuson: T. Gregory Amann Issue/Holding: We conclude that Magnuson is judicially estopped from asserting that the two twelve-year concurrent sentences are excessive. Although Magnuson contends he did not agree to the recommended sentence, the record belies his claim. Magnuson’s probation officer […]
Sentencing – Review — Factors — Character — Rehabilitative Needs
State v. Crystal L. Bizzle, 222 Wis. 2d 100, 585 N.W. 899 (Ct. App. 1998) For Bizzle: Charles B. Vetzner, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Bizzle argues that the sentencing court erred in concluding that she required extensive rehabilitation. … First, her successful completion of an educational program, after sentencing, is not evidence that the court […]
Sentencing – Factors: Seriousness of Offense
State v. Pablo Cruz Santana, 220 Wis. 2d 674, 584 N.W.2d 151 (Ct. App. 1998) For Santana: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: In passing sentence, the trial court addressed each of the primary factors, but chiefly relied on the seriousness of the offense and its continuing impact on the victim. … Santana claims, […]
SVP – Sufficiency of evidence
State v. Paul Matek, 223 Wis.2d 611, 589 N.W.2d 441 (Ct. App. 1998) For Matek: Russell Bohach Holding: Evidence to support ch. 980 SVP verdict sustained: the diagnosis took into account Matek’s refusal to participate in treatment, and therefore the verdict “was not based solely on his prior bad acts.”
SVP – Sufficiency of evidence – pedophilia
State v. Ronald J. Zanelli (II), 223 Wis.2d 545, 589 N.W.2d 687 (Ct. App. 1998) For Zanelli: Jane K. Smith. Holding: Second time’s not the charm for Zanelli, who won his 1st appeal, State v. Zanelli (I), 212 Wis. 2d 358, 569 N.W.2d 301 (Ct. App. 1997). On this subsequent appeal, the court holds the […]
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.