State v. Gerald L. Lynch, Jr., 2006 WI App 231, PFR filed 11/6/06 For Lynch: David R. Karpe Issue: Whether the sentencing court’s reliance on a television interview of the defendant, which led the court to criticize the defendant as “self-serving” rather than remorseful, violated the due process right to be sentenced on accurate information. Holding: ¶24 We… Read more
Published 2006
State v. Jeris M. Moore, 2006 WI App 162 For Moore : Richard D. Martin, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶8 The issue in this case is whether the trial court erred when it denied Moore ’s motion without an in camera review of the confidential juvenile records. We conclude that the trial court should have conducted an in… Read more
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… Read more
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… Read more
State v. Roberto Vargas Rodriguez, 2006 WI App 163, PFR filed 8/28/06; subsequent history: affirmed, 2007 WI App 252 (court assumes without deciding that statements were testimonial but holds that Rodriguez forfeited right to confrontation by intimidating witness from testifying), PFR denied 2/21/08 For Rodriguez: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether statements to… Read more
State v. Jeffrey Lorenzo Searcy, 2006 WI App 8 For Searcy: Joseph L. Sommers Issue/Holding: “(S)pontaneous, unsolicited statements offered to police officers immediately following the trauma of [declarant’s] cousin’s arrest at gunpoint” were not “testimonial” and therefore did not violate Crawford, ¶¶51-56: ¶53 Adams initiated the interaction with the officers; the police did not seek… Read more
State v. David Barton, 2006 WI App 18 For Barton: Leonard D. Kachinsky Issue: Whether the expert opinion of a crime lab analyst, presenting his own conclusions about tests performed by a non-testifying analyst, violated confrontation. Holding: ¶16 Like the unit leader’s testimony in Williams, Olson’s testimony was properly admitted because he was a qualified… Read more
State v. Xavier J. Rockette (II), 2006 WI App 103, PFR filed 6/29/06 ( prior unrelated appeal involving same defendant, different case: 2005 WI App 205) For Rockette: Timothy A. Provis Issue: Whether the witness’s repeated claim of memory loss denied Rockette confrontation within the meaning of Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004). Holding… Read more
