State v. Calvin Jerome Pirtle, 2011 WI App 89(recommended for publication); for Pirtle: Christopher J. Cherella; case activity Consent to Search – Georgia v. Randolph Pirtle’s failure to object to the police presence allowed them to act on the co-tenant’s consent to a warrantless search under Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006): ¶15 In… Read more
13. Due Process
State v. Bryan Peter Leather, 2010AP354-CR, District 1, 4/5/11 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Leather: Rex Anderegg; case activity Leather argues he was entitled to call the prosecutor as a witness to testify about the complainant’s hearsay statements to her. The 6th amendment right to present a defense (confrontation and compulsory process)… Read more
State v. Janet A. Conner, 2011 WI 8, affirming 2009 WI App 143; for Conner: Stephen E. Mays; case activity; Conner BiC; State Resp.; Reply Stalking, § 940.32 – Notice of Charge, “Course of Conduct” Stalking requires proof of, among other elements, a “course of conduct” which “means a series of 2 or more acts carried out… Read more
on certification; for Spaeth: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity Issue (formulated by On Point): Whether a statement made to law enforcement following a probationer’s honest accounting to his probation agent may derive from a “legitimate source wholly independent of compelled testimony” and therefore admissible in a criminal case, notwithstanding the promise of immunity for such statements when made to probation… Read more
State v. Jevell Williams, 2010AP1266-CR, District 1, 2/1/11 court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Williams: Bradley J. Wochowicz; case activity; Williams BiC; State Resp.; Reply Right to Present Defense – Prosecutorial Intimidation of Witness The prosecutor didn’t violate Williams’s right to present a defense by raising the possibility that his alibi witness… Read more
State v. Jason L. Miller, 2011 WI App 34; for Miller: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; Miller BiC; State Resp.; Reply If the stun belt (or other restraint) isn’t visible to the jury, the trial court need not consider its necessity before requiring that the defendant wear it during trial. “Because there is… Read more
Swarthout v. Damon Cooke, USSC No. 10-333, 1/24/11 Review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 of a state’s decision to deny parole is limited to whether the inmate was provided an opportunity to be heard and a statement of reasons why parole was denied. The federal court simply has no authority to scrutinize the merits of the… Read more
certification; for Spaeth: Shelley Fite, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; Spaeth BiC; State Resp.; Reply Review granted 2/8/11 ISSUE In Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 453, 460 (1972), the United States Supreme Court held that the government may compel incriminating testimony so long as it comes with a grant of use and derivative use immunity—that… Read more
