≡ Menu

Published 2006

State v. Justin Yang, 2006 WI App 48 For Olson: John J. Grau Issue/Holding: Defense cross-examination of a principal State’s witness was impermissibly curtailed when the trial court abruptly ended inquiry into whether the witness had threatened to cause the defendant (her ex-husband) “trouble” following his remarriage, where: The witness testified only with the aid of… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Walter T. Missouri, 2006 WI App 74 For Missouri: Jeffrey W. Jensen Issue: Whether the defense should have been allowed to cross-examine the arresting officer about an instance of misconduct between the officer and a third party which was assertedly very similar to the defense theory that the officer mistreated the defendant and planted… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Excited Utterance — General

State v. Jeffrey Lorenzo Searcy, 2006 WI App 8 For Searcy: Joseph L. Sommers Issue/Holding: ¶48 Here, Adams’ statements were properly admitted under the excited utterance hearsay exception. Adams spontaneously made the statements, without police prompting, under the stress of watching her cousin being taken into custody at gunpoint. It was only one to two… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Reinier A. Ravesteijn, 2006 WI App 250 For Ravesteijn: Rudolph L. Oldeschulte Issue/Holding: Although kidnapping for ransom, § 940.31(2)(a), is susceptible to possible mitigation of penalty from 60 to 40 years if the victim is released without permanent physical injury, testimony from counsel at a postconviction hearing that the defendant was well aware… 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: Where the defendant’s brother testified that the non-testifying complainant had recanted, the prosecution could impeach the brother with the possibility that the complainant was motivated by fear due to the brother’s gang affiliation, ¶31: “A witness’s… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Witness – Impeachment – Bias – Generally

State v. Justin Yang, 2006 WI App 48 For Olson: John J. Grau Issue/Holding: ¶11      Inquiry into a witness’s bias is always material and relevant. State v. Williamson, 84 Wis. 2d 370, 383, 267 N.W.2d 337, 343 (1978) (bias and improper motive of witness are never collateral). John Henry Wigmore has characterized cross-examination as “beyond any… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Nicole Schutte, 2006 WI App 135, PFR filed 7/21/06 For Schutte: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding1: Evidence of the driver’s marijuana use just before the accident resulting in the charged homicide by negligent use of vehicle was relevant and admissible: ¶48      Although the toxicology expert could not tie the level of THC detected in… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Keith S. Krause, 2006 WI App 43 For Krause: Roger G. Merry Issue/Holding: Because collateral attack on a prior conviction used as a sentencing enhancer is limited to denial of counsel, and because the right to counsel does not attach to a civil proceeding, a refusal revocation is not subject to collateral attack on… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS