Published 2004

State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: ¶27. Arredondo argues that his trial lawyer was ineffective for advising him not to testify. We disagree. At the Machner hearing, Arredondo’s attorney testified that he advised Arredondo not to testify for two main, albeit related, reasons. First, the lawyer testified… Read more

State v. Peter R. Cash, 2004 WI App 63 For Cash: Lynn M. Bureta Issue/Holding: Counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a suppression motion based on his assessment that the arrest was supported by probable cause; “the highly incriminating evidence against Cash known” to the authorities before the arrest in fact supported probable cause… Read more

State v. Jimmie R.R., 2004 WI App 168, motion for reconsideration denied 9/15/04 For Jimmie R.R.: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Counsel’s failure to research admissibility of testimony which controlling caselaw plainly regards as confidential was deficient: ¶23. While Swierenga’s testimony was admissible, Geske’s was not. Crowell, which Greve reaffirmed, plainly instructs that information obtained during a court-ordered… Read more

State v. Michael A. DeLain, 2004 WI App 79, PFR granted, on other grds. For DeLain: Robert R. Henak Issue/Holding: Trial counsel’s failure to “investigate and present evidence of exculpatory prior consistent statements DeLain made to co-workers” was not the product of deficient performance, given that DeLain never told counsel about these remarks, and that counsel interviewed… Read more

State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue/Holding: Failure to locate and present the testimony of a potential alibi witness wasn’t deficient given counsel’s testimony that his investigator couldn’t locate the witness, along with Arredondo’s failure to convince the court that the investigator had been informed where the… Read more

State v. David Arredondo, 2004 WI App 7, PFR filed 1/22/04 For Arredondo: James A. Rebholz Issue: Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate a theory of 3rd-party guilt, in the absence of any evidence linking that party to the crime. Holding: ¶31. A trial attorney may select a particular defense from the available alternative… Read more

State v. Jeffrey A. Keeran, 2004 WI App 4, PFR filed 1/5/04 For Keeran: Joseph L. Sommers Issue/Holding: ¶5 … The coercion defense is limited to the “most severe form of inducement.” State v. Amundson, 69 Wis. 2d 554, 568, 230 N.W.2d 775 (1975). It requires a finding “under the objective-reasonable man test, with regard… Read more