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
B. Chs. 343-346: Traffic offense
State v. Alan J. Ernst, 2005 WI 107, on certification For Ernst: Jeffrey W. Jensen Issue1: Whether violation of the standards mandated by State v. Klessig, 211 Wis. 2d 194 ¶24, 564 N.W.2d 716 (1997) for valid waiver of counsel supports a collateral attack on a prior conviction. Holding1: ¶25 … For there to be a valid collateral… Read more
State v. Brandon J. Matke, 2005 WI App 4, PFR filed 1/6/05 For Matke: James B. Connell Issue: Whether the number of prior OWI convictions used for penalty enhancement, § 346.65(2), is determined as of date offense is committed or date of sentencing for offense. Holding: ¶5. How and when to count prior OMVWI convictions for purposes of penalty… Read more
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 admissible unless otherwise… Read more
State v. Patrick J. Fahey, 2005 WI App 171 Issue: Whether requested alternative testing at agency expense is deemed a “request” within § 343.305(5)(a) where made after driver was released from custody, left police department, and then returned about 15 minutes later, ¶7. Holding: ¶14 … The State, in keeping with the circuit court’s decision, argues… Read more
State v. Brandon J. Matke, 2005 WI App 4, PFR filed 1/6/05 For Matke: James B. Connell Issue/Holding: ¶16. Matke also contends that the trial court’s interpretation of Wis. Stat. § 346.65(2), which is now ours as well, violates due process because it permits the court to sentence him for a sixth OMVWI without requiring the State to… Read more
State v. Joseph L. Smet, 2005 WI App 263 For Smet: Christopher A. Mutschler Issue/Holding: Proof of “impairment” is not a necessary element of § 346.63, ¶¶12-16. Section 346.63(1)(am) (driving under influence of detectable amount of THC, regardless of impairment) is constitutional as against police power, due process, and equal protection attack, ¶¶6… Read more
State v. Larry N. Winsand, 2004 WI App 86, PFR filed 4/12/04 For Winsand: Ralph A. Kalal Issue: Whether results of an Intoximeter EC/IR breath test was inadmissible because approval of this testing instrument by the chief of the DOT chemical test section involved standards that should have been but were not promulgated as administrative rules under… Read more
