The Supreme Court of Wisconsin’s deadline for deciding cases is June 30th, but according to a May 21st court memo they had only discussed 23% of the cases they plan to decide this term. The Chief says what the justices need are more opportunities to discuss their cases. What Justices Crooks, Prosser, Roggensack, Gabelman and Ziegler voted for was a time limit on discussions. One thing’s certain. If the justices intend to get all of their work done this term, they’re likely looking a lot of “all nighters” in the next 18 days. How does this year’s backlog compare to the backlogs last year and the year before and the year before? Click here to find out. It’s not pretty.
On Point
by the Wisconsin State Public Defender
Important Posts!
- COA reverses order excluding other acts evidence, holds that greater latitude rule weakens holding of Alsteen
- In HUGE defense win, COA emphasizes that obtaining an involuntary med order is no walk in the park for the State
- SCOTUS tempers pro-gun 2nd Amendment precedent; holds States may disarm a citizen who poses “a clear threat of physical violence to another”
- COA holds, in unpublished but citable decision, that the preponderance of the evidence standard applies at a TPR dispositional hearing
- D3 affirms denial of plea withdrawal claim under Cross’ “higher, but not substantially higher” rule
Ahead in SCOW
October 7
Petitions Conference
November 11
Oral argument in Kaul v. Urmanski
November 12
Petitions conference
December 10
Petitions conference
Contact Us
On Point is sponsored by the Wisconsin State Public Defender. All content is subject to public disclosure. Comments are moderated. If you have questions about this blog, please email [email protected].
Disclaimer
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.
This site rocks the Classic Responsive Skin for Thesis.
More discussion? Seriously? What SCOW ought to do is take a lesson from the 7th Cir., and not regularly issue 50+ page opinions. Who wants to read 50+ pages on spraying trees? 15 – 20 pages are more than enough for virtually any opinion that this court issues.