13. Due Process

State v. William Thomas Hudson, III, 2010AP1598-CR, District 4, 9/13/12 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity ¶9        “The concept of outrageous governmental conduct originates from the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” [State v. Givens, 217 Wis. 2d 180, 188, 580 N.W.2d 340 (Ct. App. 1998).] Outrageous governmental conduct may arise where… Read more

State v. Tenesha T., 2012AP1283, District 1, 9/5/12 court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity Parent’s right to be present during TPR trial wasn’t violated when court allowed 30 minutes of testimony during parent’s volunary absence: ¶16      Tenesha bases her argument on Shirley E., contending that a parent’s right to be present during termination… Read more

State v. Scott E. Schmidt, 2012 WI App 113 (recommended for publication); case activity Adequate Provocation Defense, §§ 939.44(1),  940.01(2)(a) – Test for Admissibility The “some evidence,” rather than Schmidt’s proposed less stringent “mere relevance,” standard controls admissibility of evidence of adequate provocation that would reduce first- to second-degree intentional homicide: ¶9        When applying the some evidence… Read more

seventh circuit decision Sex Offender Registration – Due Process Right to Correct Errors  Given restrictions on sex offender registrants, more than mere reputational stigma is at stake, and due process therefore requires the implementation of some mechanism for correcting errors in the registry. That brings us to the heart of the due process claim in… Read more

State v. Troy L. Cameron, 2012 WI App 93 (recommended for publication); case activity Prosecutorial Vindictiveness – Neither Presumptive or Actual for Increased Charges Following Rejected Plea Offer  Cameron failed to establish prosecutorial vindictiveness in the filing of an amended information containing additional charges, after he rejected a plea offer to the original information. State v. Johnson, 2000… Read more

State v. Joseph J. Spaeth, 2012 WI 95, on certification; case activity Probationer’s statement, compelled by rules of his supervision, is covered by derivative as well as use immunity in a criminal prosecution. ¶3   We hold that the statement that Spaeth made to Oshkosh police was derived from the compelled, incriminating, testimonial statement that he made to his… Read more

State v. Jon Anthony Soto, 2012 WI 93, on certification; case activity A guilty plea defendant has a statutory right under § 971.04(1)(g) to be present in court when the plea is accepted and judgment pronounced, but the right may be waived (as distinguished from forfeited), as it was here. ¶2   We conclude that Wis. Stat. § 971.04(1)(g) provides a criminal defendant the statutory… Read more