State v. Kevin D. James, 2005 WI App 188 For James: Terry W. Rose Issue/Holding: The mere fact that § 908.08 imposes a mandatory protocol (videotape admitted into evidence first; child called to testify afterward) violates neither confrontation, ¶¶10-14, nor separation-of-powers, ¶¶15-25, doctrines.This statutory procedure allows the State to introduce a child’s videotaped statement, with the… Read more
H. Hearsay, Ch. 908
State v. Joseph J. Guerard, 2004 WI 85, reversing unpublished decision of court of appeals For Guerard: Joseph L. Sommers Issue/Holding: ¶23. The central issue in this case is the extent of corroboration required under Wis. Stat. § 908.045(4) for statements tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused. We addressed this… Read more
State v. Jimmie R.R., 2004 WI App 168, motion for reconsideration denied 9/15/04 For Jimmie R.R.: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: A child’s videotaped statement may be admitted under the residual exception, § 908.03(24), without satisfying all the requirements of § 908.08. ¶40. The trial court properly applied the trustworthiness test of State… Read more
State v. Matthew J. Knapp, 2003 WI 121, on certification For Knapp: Robert G. LeBell Issue/Holding: ¶184. We find no clear error in the circuit court’s determination that the third-party hearsay evidence in item 21(a) of Knapp’s offer of proof comes within the recent perception exception under Wis. Stat. § 908.045(2),29 to the hearsay rule. Farrell’s inability to… Read more
State v. Patricia A. Weed, 2003 WI 85, affirming unpublished opinion of court of appeals For Weed: T. Christopher Kelly Issue/Holding: ¶16. Weed argues that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion in admitting Michael’s statement regarding unloading the .357 because the statement did not meet the statutory requirements for admissibility under Wis. Stat. § 908.045(2). Weed principally… Read more
State v. Sherrie S. Tucker, 2003 WI 12, on certification For Tucker: Paul LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶32. At the postconviction hearing, the circuit court upheld its prior ruling that McCray’s statements were not admissible as either statements against penal interest or under the residual exception to the hearsay rule. The circuit court noted… Read more
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly Issue/Holding1: “(W)e conclude that ‘assertion,’ as used in § 908.01(1) means an expression of a fact, condition, or opinion.” ¶38. And, the speaker must intend the utterance to be an “assertion” as thus defined, because “when a speaker… Read more
State v. Daniel H. Kutz, 2003 WI App 205, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Kutz: T. Christopher Kelly Issue: Whether a homicide victim’s statement – “If I am not home in half an hour come looking for me” – was a hearsay “statement,” as defined in § 908.01(1), i.e., offered for the truth of the matter… Read more
