≡ Menu

B. Non-statutory defenses

State v. Jason C. Miller, 2004 WI App 117, PFR filed 6/7/04 For Miller: Robert T. Ruth Issue/Holding: Claim preclusion doesn’t bind subsequent action involving exclusion of evidence due to discovery violation, where sanctioned case was dismissed and then reissued and discovery begun anew:: ¶26. We conclude that claim preclusion is not applicable for two independent reasons… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Defenses – Claim Preclusion, Generally

State ex rel Kim J. Barksdale v. Litscher, 2004 WI App 130 Issue/Holding: ¶13. Barksdale next argues that, even if the circuit court properly allowed the warden to raise claim preclusion as a defense, the defense must fail because all of the elements for claim preclusion are not present. The burden of proving claim preclusion… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Jason C. Miller, 2004 WI App 117, PFR filed 6/7/04 For Miller: Robert T. Ruth Issue/Holding: Issue preclusion doesn’t bind subsequent action involving exclusion of evidence due to discovery violation, where sanctioned case was dismissed and then reissued and discovery begun anew: ¶22. In the second action, the facts were different in that Miller already… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Jason C. Miller, 2004 WI App 117, PFR filed 6/7/04 For Miller: Robert T. Ruth Issue/Holding: Judicial estoppel didn’t prevent admissibility of evidence excluded as discovery sanction in prior, dismissed but then reissued action, where judge who dismissed prior action after imposing sanction contemplated that the excluded evidence would not be barred in a… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Munir A. Hamdan, 2003 WI 113, on bypass For Hamdan: Chris J. Trebatoski Issue/Holding: ¶86. In the meantime, we must give effect to the constitutional right embodied in Article I, Section 25.39 A defendant who challenges on constitutional grounds a prosecution for carrying a concealed weapon will be required to secure affirmative answers to the following legal… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Waylon Picotte, 2003 WI 42, on certification For Picotte: John T. Wasielewski Issue: Whether conviction for homicide is barred because the victim did not die within a year and a day of infliction of the fatal injuries. Holding: ¶5. We disagree with the circuit court and hold that the defendant’s conviction in this case is… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Jeffrey B. Haines, 2003 WI 39, 2002 WI App 139 For Haines: Mark A. Huesmann, Sonja Davig Huesmann Issue/Holding: An extension of the limitation period for prosecuting a crime, before the prior limitation period has expired, doesn’t violate the ex post facto clause of the Wisconsin Constitution. ¶15. In sum, the court of appeals succinctly and… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Michael S. Johnson v. Berge, 2003 WI App 51 Issue/Holding: Review of issue preclusion is governed by Paige K.B. v. Steven G.B., 226 Wis. 2d 210, 594 Wis. 2d 370 (1999). The record isn’t sufficient to review the issue. ¶¶13-14. For discussion on preclusive effect of state court suppression ruling on federal court dealing with same evidence… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS