≡ Menu

Published 2005

State v. Tyrone Booker, 2005 WI App 182 For Booker: Jeffrey W. Jensen Issue/Holding: Defense cross-examination focusing on inconsistencies in statements of the alleged victim permitted the State to read her entire first statement to the jury under the completeness doctrine; State v. Eugenio, 210 Wis. 2d 347, 565 N.W.2d 798 (Ct. App. 1997), followed… Read more

{ 0 comments }

§ 902.01(2), Judicial Notice — Generally

State v. Leonard A. Sarnowski, 2005 WI App 48 For Sarnowski: Michael K. Gould, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶13. Trial courts may take judicial notice in limited areas-“fact[s] generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court,” or “fact[s] capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be… Read more

{ 0 comments }

§ 904.01, Relevance – Generally – FSTs

State v. Richard B. Wilkens, 2005 WI App 36 For Wilkens: Waring R. Fincke Issue/Holding: ¶14. In Wisconsin, the general standard for admissibility is very low. Generally, evidence need only be relevant to be admissible. See Wis. Stat. § 904.02; State v. Eugenio, 219 Wis. 2d 391, 411, 579 N.W.2d 642 (1998) (“All relevant evidence is… Read more

{ 0 comments }

§ 904.01, Relevance – Field Sobriety Test

State v. Richard B. Wilkens, 2005 WI App 36 For Wilkens: Waring R. Fincke Issue/Holding: Field sobriety tests (alphabet and finger-to-nose tests; and heel-to-toe walk) “are observational tools, not litmus tests that scientifically correlate certain types or numbers of ‘clues’ to various blood alcohol concentrations,” ¶17. Thus, the officer’s observations of Wilkens’ performance isn’t treated… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Sheldon C. Stank, 2005 WI App 236 For Stank: Dennis P. Coffey Issue/Holding: On charges of drug trafficking while armed, possession of guns (along with flash suppressor and bulletproof vest) was admissible as relevant for purposes other than “bad character,” ¶¶35-39. (State v. Spraggin, 77 Wis. 2d 89, 252 N.W.2d 94 (1977) and… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Plea Agreements — Judicial Participation

State v. Antoine T. Hunter, 2005 WI App 5 For Hunter: James R. Lucius Issue: Whether the trial court’s observation to defendant, following denial of an assertedly “dispositive” suppression motion, that acquittal was “unlikely,” but that “coming forward and admitting your guilt” would provide “the opportunity to get some credit,” amounted to judicial participation in… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Jarmal Nelson, 2005 WI App 113 For Nelson: Wm. J. Tyroler, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue: Whether Nelson’s successful attempt to withdraw three of five bargain-based guilty pleas had the effect of abrogating the entire agreement so as to require withdrawal of the other two pleas. Holding: ¶23      Finally, Nelson asserts that if he… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Kimberly B., 2005 WI App 115 For Kimberly B.: Anthony G. Milisauskas Issue/Holding: Other acts evidence that on two prior occasions the defendant, while disciplining her child, had struck the child with sufficient force to cause injury and require government intervention, was relevant and admissible under § 904.04 to prove the intent element of… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS