≡ Menu

b. Not found

State v. Dion W. Demmerly, 2006 WI App 181, PFR filed 9/11/06 For Demmerly: Edward J. Hunt Issue/Holding: Counsel’s cross-examination of state’s witness testifying under a grant of immunity was adequate where it revealed that the witness’s motivation for testifying was a desire to receive leniency on his pending charges, ¶22; and, also where any confusion about… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Roberto Vargas Rodriguez, 2006 WI App 163, PFR filed 8/28/06 For Rodriguez: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶39      Questions that call for a narrative are generally improper because they do not alert court and counsel to the subject about which the witness is about to testify. There are exceptions, however, and whether… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Juan F. Milanes, 2006 WI App 259, PFR filed 12/7/06 Milanes: Joan M. Boyd Issue/Holding: Counsel’s failure to litigate a (Miranda) suppression motion was not deficient where the issue turned purely on a credibility dispute between defendant and the detective and pursuit of the motion would have required rejecting a favorable offer, ¶¶15-16… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Juan F. Milanes, 2006 WI App 259, PFR filed 12/7/06 For Milanes: Joan M. Boyd Issue/Holding: Failure to pursue an NGI defense wasn’t deficient: ¶19      … The evidence in support of Milanes’ claim is remarkably weak; the strongest piece of evidence is the report of his psychiatric expert, which contains a conclusory statement that Milanes… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. John R. Maloney, 2005 WI 74, affirming 2004 WI App 141, but nonetheless retaining jurisdiction pending resolution of other issues For Maloney: Lew A. Wasserman Issue/Holding: Failure to move to suppress evidence based on asserted violation of SCR 20:4.2 does not support deficient performance, given that applicability of this Rule was not settled: ¶23      The split of authorities described… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: “Second, Arredondo claims that his trial attorney failed to impeach Garza’s testimony with false statements Garza made to the police. This claim fails on both the deficiency and prejudice prongs. Arredondo cannot show prejudice because Garza admitted on direct-examination that… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. John R. Maloney, 2004 WI App 141, affirmed, 2005 WI 74 For Maloney: Lew A. Wasserman Issue/Holding: ¶18. Maloney complains trial counsel invited a Haseltine violation against him by asking on cross-examination whether Skorlinski believed anything Maloney had told him in the investigation. See State v. Haseltine, 120 Wis. 2d 92, 352 N.W.2d 673 (Ct. App. 1984). We disagree.… ¶21… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: ¶49. Arredondo further claims that his trial lawyer should have moved to admit pursuant to Wis. Stat. Rule 908.045(1) (declarant unavailable) the transcript of Arredondo’s testimony at the 1995 sexual-assault trial. Arredondo contends that the trial court would have… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS