Page 7 of 1004
COA upholds statute prohibiting possession of a firearm while intoxicated despite State’s failure to adequately litigate matter in circuit court
State v. Bernabe Gonzalez, 2024AP358-CR, 5/6/25, District I (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity In what we believe is COA’s first foray into the vexing world of firearm regulation post-Bruen and Rahimi, COA holds that Wisconsin’s statute prohibiting intoxicated persons from “going armed” passes muster under an originalist legal analysis.
- 1. Appeals
- C. Briefs/Appendices
- C. Unpublished Opinions
- D. Waiver of issues/arguments
- 4. Argument
- d. Undeveloped argument
- E. Chapter 941: Against public
- 5. Constitutionality of statute
- 6. Court may ignore waiver
- 9. Crimes
- K. Standards of Review
- 12. State's waiver
- 34. Bear Arms, 2nd Am.
- 46. WI Court of Appeals
May 6, 2025
COA finds preserving electric vehicle’s battery no defense for driving too slowly on the expressway.
State v. Colin R. Dowling, 2024AP524, 5/1/25, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity The COA found sufficient evidence to sustain Colin Dowling’s civil forfeiture obligation for impeding traffic by driving at a slow speed. Although Dowling argued that there were no reasonable alternatives to slowing down his Tesla to preserve its battery, […]
- 1. Appeals
- B. Chs. 343-346: Traffic offense
- 2. Elements
- C. Unpublished Opinions
- 9. Crimes
- K. Standards of Review
- 26. Sufficiency of evidence
- 46. WI Court of Appeals
May 1, 2025
COA affirms recommitment and involuntary medication orders over sufficiency and hearsay challenges in detailed discussion
Fond du Lac County v. D.P.E., 2025AP66-FT, 4/30/25, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity COA affirms the circuit court’s orders recommitting D.P.E. (referred to as “Donald”) and authorizing the involuntarily administration of medication. Donald argued on appeal that the county did not present sufficient evidence to establish dangerousness and failed to meet […]
Seventh Circuit affirms in Wisconsin-originating habeas on juror intrusion claim; analyzes Wisconsin’s no-merit procedure
Leon Carter v. Lizzie Tiegels, No. 23-1266, 4/24/25 In a knotty habeas case, the complexities of habeas corpus law mean that Carter’s challenges to how COA handled his no-merit appeal and an underlying (and unique) claim of juror intrusion do not merit relief.
- B. Federal
- 5. Particular issues
- H. Deliberations
- h. Jury issues
- I. Questions by jurors
- 22. Habeas corpus
- 25. Jury
April 28, 2025
COA reverses, holding deputy lacked probable cause to search truck under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement
State v. Jonah Michael Hoffman, 2024AP1221-CR, 4/24/25, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity The sole issue on appeal is whether the deputy who arrested Hoffman had probable cause to search his truck for evidence of an open container. COA concludes that probable cause was lacking, and accordingly reverses and remands with directions […]
- a. Field Sobriety Testing
- a. Auto
- 2. Traffic stops
- 6. Search incident to arrest
- G. Reasonable suspicion
- I. Suppression hearings
- 35. Search & Seizure
April 24, 2025
Defense wins sufficiency of evidence claim in COA after trial for possessing intoxicating liquor without a license.
State v. Kimberly D. Rowe, 2022AP2122-CR, 4/22/25, District III (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity The COA considered when a collection of liquor bottles behind the counter of what appeared to be a bar becomes “intoxicating liquor” for which a license is required to possess for intended sales. Because the State did not prove […]
SCOTUS grants cert to determine whether restitution is penal for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause
Holsey Ellingburg, Jr. v. United States, USSC No. 24-557, certiorari granted 4/7/25 SCOTUS added to its 2025-26 docket on April 7, when it granted the petitioner’s cert. petition to address the following: Question presented: Whether criminal restitution under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA) is penal for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause.
April 23, 2025
COA affirms TPR, holding parent failed to establish prejudice due to admission of “arguably inadmissible hearsay”
State v. T.N., 2024AP1280, 4/22/25, District I (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity T.N. appeals, arguing that she received ineffective assistance of counsel when her attorney did not object to statements she contends are inadmissible hearsay. COA assumes without deciding that the statements were hearsay and affirms the circuit court’s orders, concluding there was […]
Page 7 of 1004
