State v. Bryan James Krueger, 2008 WI App 162 For Krueger: Bradley J. Lochowicz Issue/Holding: ¶15 Here, Mason was asked whether she had formed an opinion as to whether or not S.B. “was the product of any suggestibility or any coaching.” … Signs of coaching or suggestion could fall into the realm of knowledge that… Read more
G. Opinions/experts, Ch. 907
State v. Louis H. LaCount, 2007 WI App 116, affirmed, 2008 WI 59, ¶20 For LaCount: T. Christopher Kelly Issue/Holding: ¶19 Under Wis. Stat. § 907.04, “[t]estimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact.” See, e.g… Read more
State v. Forest S. Shomberg, 2006 WI 9, affirming unpublished decision For Shomberg: Charles W. Giesen; Morris D. Berman Issue/Holding: Trial court’s refusal to admit expert testimony on factors influencing witness’s ability to identify a stranger during a lineup procedure, in particular the distorting effect of a simultaneous as opposed to sequential procedure, was not… Read more
State v. Lionel N. Anderson, 2005 WI App 238 For Anderson: Harry R. Hertel; Steven H. Gibbs Issue/Holding: Where the State’s expert witness never interviewed the victim (nor viewed a videotape of the victim’s statement), the defendant wasn’t entitled to a psychological examination of the victim pursuant to State v. Maday, 179 Wis. 2d 346… Read more
State v. Sheldon C. Stank, 2005 WI App 236 For Stank: Dennis P. Coffey Issue/Holding: Proof of the controlled substance is sufficient where a “presumptive” test is followed by a “confirmatory” one (State v. Dye, 215 Wis. 2d 281, 572 N.W.2d 524 (Ct. App. 1997), followed), with the PDR being used to establish the presumption: ¶42 Here, the… Read more
Brown County v. Shannon R., 2005 WI 160, reversing unpublished opinion For Shannon R.: Brian C. Findley, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether the circuit court erroneously exercised discretion in precluding expert testimony on the issue of whether the TPR respondent is likely to be able to meet the conditions for return of her children. Holding… Read more
State v. Victor K. Johnson, 2004 WI 94, affirming unpublished decision of court of appeals Issue: Whether the State impermissibly cross-examined the defendant about the truthfulness of another witness. Holding: ¶2. We conclude that the purpose and effect of the prosecutor’s cross-examination of Johnson was to impeach Johnson’s credibility, not to bolster the credibility of… Read more
State v. Derryle S. McDowell, 2003 WI App 168, affirmed, 2004 WI 70 For McDowell: Christopher J. Cherella Amici: Keith A. Findley, John T. Savee, John A. Pray, Frank Remington Center & WACDL Issue/Holding: “(N)o witness may testify as an expert on issues of domestic law; ‘the only “expert” on domestic law is the court.’… Read more
