State v. Charles Lamar, 2009 WI App 133, PFR filed 9/10/09 For Lamar: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: No presumption of vindictiveness applied to resentencing by a different judge upon guilty pleas re-entered after the original trial court granted Lamar’s postconviction motion to withdraw the initial guilty pleas. ¶17 In Naydihor, our supreme court found that… Read more
Published 2009
State v. Lord L. Sturdivant, 2009 WI App 5, PFR filed 1/13/09 For Sturdivant: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶8 Due process “requires that vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial.” North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711… Read more
State v. Terion Lamar Robinson, 2009 WI App 97 For Robinson: Beth A. Eisendrath Issue/Holding: Given the trial court finding that Robinson either lived or stayed at the apartment, the police were authorized to enter to effectuate his arrest under auspices of an arrest warrant: ¶16 In Blanco, the police, who had an arrest warrant for Blanco… Read more
State v. Jeremy D. Schladweiler, 2009 WI App 177 Pro se Issue/Holding: ¶9 Commonly referred to as “boot camp,” the CIP is governed by Wis. Stat. § 302.045, which provides that “the [DOC] shall provide a challenge incarceration program for inmates selected to participate” after meeting the eligibility requirements for the program. Sec. 302.045(1). … ¶10 … Read more
State v. Michael A. Sveum, 2009 WI App 81, affirmed on other grounds, 2010 WI 92 For Sveum: Robert J. Kaiser, Jr. Issue/Holding: A search warrant for seizure of the sorts of items Sveum used or kept in connection with a 1996 stalking conviction established probable cause he was keeping such items in 2003: ¶35 The… Read more
State v. Michael A. Sveum, 2009 WI App 81, affirmed on other grounds, 2010 WI 92 For Sveum: Robert J. Kaiser, Jr. Issue/Holding: ¶40 Sveum’s particularity argument is that the many items authorized for seizure were so “non-specific” that the warrant was an invalid general warrant. Police were authorized to seize phone bills, journals, calendars, logs, computers… Read more
State v. Michael A. Sveum, 2009 WI App 81, affirmed on other grounds, 2010 WI 92 For Sveum: Robert J. Kaiser, Jr. Issue/Holding: The Wisconsin Electronic Surveillance Control Law excludes from coverage “(a)ny communication from a tracking device,” § 968.27(4)(d); a GPS device is such a “tracking device” and, therefore excluded from WESCL coverage… Read more
State v. John David Ohlinger, 2009 WI App 44, PFR filed 4/1/09 For Ohlinger: Suzanne L. Hagopian, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶8 The one-party consent exception reads as follows: (2) It is not unlawful …:…. (b) For a person acting under color of law to intercept a wire, electronic or oral communication, where the person is a party… Read more
