≡ Menu

K. Standards of Review

State v. David W. Stevens, 2012 WI 97, affirming unpublished decision; case activity Miranda-Edwards Rule – Invocation of Counsel, Initiation of Contact by Suspect Where an in-custody suspect invokes his right to counsel and interrogation immediately ceases, but the suspect himself then initiates a request to continue the interrogation, the police may proceed with questioning if fresh Miranda warnings are given and validly waived. Edwards v… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Roshawn Smith, 2012 WI 91, reversing in part, affirming in part unpublished decision; case activity Standard of Review: Sufficiency of Evidence  ¶29  We understand Smith’s central argument regarding the standard of review on the evidentiary question to be summed up in the proposition that a jury verdict of guilt[9] must be reversed on appeal if “[t]he inferences that… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Confrontation – Expert Testimony

Sandy Williams v. Illinois, USSC No. 10-8505, 6/18/12, affirming People v. Williams, 238 Ill. 2d 125, 939 N.E. 268 A split Court (4-1-4) upholds against Confrontation objection, admissibility of expert testimony that a DNA profile, produced by a different lab, matched Williams’ profile. Because the rationale favoring admissibility doesn’t earn a clear majority of votes, the opinion… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Willie H. Jackson, 2012 WI App 76 (recommended for publication); case activity § 973.048(1m) (2003-04) authorizes the sentencing court to require sex offender registration under § 301.45 for conviction of enumerated crimes, “if the court determines that the underlying conduct was sexually motivated as defined in s. 980.01(5)” and public protection would be advanced thereby. (“Sexually… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Best Price Plumbing, Inc. v. Erie Insurance Exchange, 2012 WI 44; case activity ¶37 n. [11]: In State v. Ndina, 2009 WI 21, ¶29, 315 Wis. 2d 653, 761 N.W.2d 612, this court recognized that the terms “forfeiture” and “waiver” are often used interchangeably, but that the terms embody distinct legal concepts.  Forfeiture is the failure to make the timely assertion of… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Question Presented (from cert petition):  In Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (2010), this Court held that criminal defendants receive ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment when their attorneys fail to advise them that pleading guilty to an offense will subject them to deportation. The question presented is whether Padilla applies to… Read more

{ 1 comment }

court of appeals decision; for Beamon: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; prior post Elements, Fleeing, § 346.04(3) – Instructions – Sufficiency of Proof – Harmless Error  Issues (from Beamon’s Petition for Review): Is a jury instruction which describes the factual theory alleged to satisfy an element legally erroneous? In a criminal case, are the instructions… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Levi Alexander Rodebaugh, 2011AP2659-CR, District 4, 4/5/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Rodebaugh: Bryon J. Walker; case activity Grant of mistrial was unsupported by “manifest necessity,” hence was an erroneous exercise of discretion, where the complainant failed to show for trial and couldn’t be quickly located. Retrial is therefore barred as… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS