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
Double Jeopardy – Prosecutorial Misconduct: Retrial Barred Notwithstanding Absence of Defense Request for Mistrial
State v. Lettice (II), 221 Wis. 2d 69, 585 N.W.2d 171 (Ct. App. 1998) (prior history: State v. John A. Lettice (I), 205 Wis. 2d 347, 556 N.W.2d 376 (Ct. App. 1996); subsequent history: BAPR v. Steven M. Lucareli, 2000 WI 55) For Lettice: John Allan Pray, UW Law School Issue/Holding: We conclude that (1) Lettice is […]
Enhancer — § 161.48(2) (1993-94), Drug Offender — Second or Subsequent Offense
State v. Frank Miles, 221 Wis. 2d 56, 584 N.W.2d 703 (Ct. App. 1998) For Miles: Craig W. Albee Issue/Holding: Prior drug conviction is not element of crime of second or subsequent drug offense, § 161.48(2) (1993-94), which elevates what would otherwise be misdemeanor to felony possession: Miles fails to recognize the distinction between the two […]
Enhancers — § 961.49, Youth Center
Debra L. Van Riper, 222 Wis. 2d 197, 586 N.W.2d 198 (Ct. App. 1998) For Van Riper: Megan L. DeVore Issue/Holding: Because day care centers provide recreational and social services activities for children, they are a subset of “youth centers” and come within the definition of places listed in § 961.49(2), Stats. The protection of […]
Enhancer — Persistent Repeater, § 939.62(2m)(b) — Equal Protection Challenge
State v. Damone J. Block, 222 Wis. 2d 586, 587 N.W.2d 914 (Ct. App. 1998) For Block: James M. Weber Issue/Holding: The persistent repeater scheme survives equal protection challenge. Block concedes that the persistent repeater statute deserves only the rational basis test. He argues that there are no reasonable or practical grounds for the manner in which […]
Forfeiture — Constitutionality — § 346.65(6)
State v. Lance Terry Konrath, 218 Wis.2d 290, 577 N.W.2d 601 (1998), affirming unpub. decision For Konrath: Ralph A. Kalal Issue/Holding: Forfeiture statute § 346.65(6) authorizes a civil, remedial in rem proceeding, and is not facially unconstitutional; because the statute is civil, double jeopardy doesn’t apply; the proceeding provides sufficient notice to satisfy due process (with caution that […]
Forfeiture — “Owner” of Subject Property, § 973.075(1)(b)2
State v. Walter A. Kirch, 222 Wis. 2d 598, 587 N.W.2d 919 (Ct. App. 1998) For Kirch: Timothy J. Gaskell Issue/Holding: The federal courts continue to consider possession, title, control and financial stake when determining ownership under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(7). … We therefore consider these factors when determining ownership for the purposes of § […]
Expectation of Privacy — Hospital Emergency Room
State v. Melvin Thompson, 222 Wis. 2d 179, 585 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1998) For Thompson: Phillip J. Brehm Issue/Holding: No published Wisconsin case has specifically addressed whether one has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a hospital emergency room or operating room. Accordingly, we analyze the question under the general approach for determining whether […]
Expectation of Privacy — Guest — Overstaying Welcome
Kelly L. McCray, 220 Wis. 2d 705, 583 N.W.2d 668 (Ct. App. 1998) For McCray: Paul LaZotte Issue/Holding: A guest who has exceeded his authorized stay loses any expectation of privacy in the residence
Attempted Fraudulent Acquistion of Controlled Substance, § 961.43(1) — Sufficiency of Evidence
State v. Linda M. Henthorn, 218 Wis. 2d 526, 581 N.W.2d 544 (Ct. App. 1998) For Henthorn: Michael Yovovich, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding1: In Hamiel v. State, 92 Wis.2d 656, 666, 285 N.W.2d 639, 646 (1979), the supreme court outlined the two requirements for proof of an attempted crime: [I]t must … be shown that: […]
§ 940.10, Negligent Homicide — corporate liability
State v. Steenberg Homes, 223 Wis.2d 511, 589 N.W.2d 668 (Ct. App. 1998) Holding: Corporations are subject to criminal liability under Wis. Stat. § 940.10
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.