State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly Issue/Holding1: “(W)e conclude that ‘assertion,’ as used in § 908.01(1) means an expression of a fact, condition, or opinion.” ¶38. And, the speaker must intend the utterance to be an “assertion” as thus defined, because “when a speaker… Read more
Published 2003
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly Issue: Whether a homicide victim’s statement – “If I am not home in half an hour come looking for me” – was a hearsay “statement,” as defined in § 908.01(1), i.e., offered for the truth of the matter… Read more
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly Issue: Whether the declarant’s statement to another relating a threat by the defendant was admissible as an excited utterance, § 908.03(2). Holding: ¶65. We agree with the State that the first two elements of this exception are met… Read more
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly Issue: Whether statements made by the declarant to others describing various threats made by the defendant were admissible under the state-of-mind hearsay exception, § 908.03(3). Holding: ¶60 Since there are no Wisconsin cases that have resolved this issue… Read more
State v. Robert L. Snider, 2003 WI App 172, PFR filed 8/22/03 For Snider: Timothy J. Gaskell Issue: Whether a child-victim’s videotaped statement must satisfy all the conditions in § 908.08, or may instead satisfy the residual exception. Holding: ¶12. We agree with the State that the plain language of Wis. Stat. § 908.08(7) permits the admission of a child’s… Read more
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly Issue/Holding1: ¶51. The recent perception exception is similar to the hearsay exceptions for present sense impression and excited utterances, but was intended to allow more time between the observation of the event and the statement in cases where… Read more
State v. Robert Jamont Wright, 2003 WI App 252 For Wright: Ann Auberry Issue/Holding: ¶43. Wright argues that Lomack’s testimony was relevant on the issue of whether the police lineup was suggestive. In assessing relevance, the trial court must determine whether the evidence has any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is… Read more
State v. William A. Silva, 2003 WI App 191, PFR filed 9/4/03 For Silva: Martin E. Kohler, Brian Kinstler, Donald E. Chewning Issue/Holding: ¶29 …. Silva’s brother testified that on the day of the assault Silva attended a service that discussed the act of “sinning again.” Silva’s brother stated that Silva sat down during the… Read more
