State v. V.A., 2015AP1614, 7/19/16, District 1 (1-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity V.A. presented many issues on appeal, and the court rejected all of them. The most interesting ones concern collateral attacks on CHIPS orders, competency, and whether Wisconsin’s “failure to assume parental responsibility” statute is unconstitutional as applied to V.A. Collateral attack… Read more
admin
OLR v. John Kenyatta Riley, 2016 WI 70, 7/15/16; case activity (including briefs) Leaving us with another splintered decision as the current term comes to its end, a majority of the supreme court votes to publicly reprimand an attorney for “offering” false testimony from his client and then failing to take reasonable measures to correct the testimony. The… Read more
The last decision is out, and the numbers are in. SCOW has set some new records. Click SCOWstats to learn about the court’s record-breaking 2015-2016 term… Read more
A prosecutor’s exercise of discretion can trigger or avoid collateral consequences for your client. This new law review article analyzes how and why prosecutors make these decisions… Read more
So far, only one Wisconsin case has interpreted and applied our new Castle Doctrine law–State v. Chew, 2014 WI App 116. Attorneys researching the issue may find a new law review article about this history of this type of legislation helpful… Read more
State v. Giancarlo Giacomantonio, 2016 WI App 62; case activity (including briefs) This is Wisconsin’s first published decision about how parties are to authenticate photographs of text messages so that they are admissible at trial. The answer is the same way they authenticate other kinds of evidence–via §909.01 and §909.015. Nothing more is required. At Giacomantonio’s trial… Read more
State v. C.A.P., 2016AP824, District 1, 7/12/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity While § 48.427(1) gives a parent the right to present evidence and be heard at a dispositional hearing, in this case the trial court properly exercised its discretion in excluding two of C.A.P.’s witnesses and denying her request to recall a witness… Read more
State v. Eric L. Loomis, 2016 WI 68, 6/13/06, on certification from the court of appeals, case activity (including briefs) The developer of COMPAS says that he didn’t design it to be used in sentencing, and he won’t disclose its “trade secret” algorithm. See Pro Publica interview here. But in a 7-0 decision (with 2 concurrences) SCOW… Read more
