State v. Christopher Baron, 2009 WI 58, affirming 2008 WI App 90 For Baron: Daniel P. Dunn Issue/Holding: The charge of identity theft, based on Baron’s alleged conduct in sending emails from Fischer’s account without authorization and with intent to harm his reputation, is “content based” within the meaning of First Amendment analysis: ¶38 In the case at… Read more
19. First Amendment
State v. Christopher Baron, 2009 WI 58, affirming 2008 WI App 90 For Baron: Daniel P. Dunn Issue/Holding: First amendment analysis applies to an identity theft charge alleging that Baron sent emails from Fischer’s account without authorization and with intent to harm his reputation: ¶16 In order to determine if a First Amendment analysis is required, we… Read more
State v. Robert T., 2008 WI App 22For Robert T.: Bradley J. Bloch Issue: Whether § 947.015 (2003-04) (“Bomb Scares”) is overbroad and therefore cannot support prosecution for a phoned-in but false bomb threat. Holding: ¶12 Robert T. argues that the statute suffers from overbreadth because it prohibits speech that could be protected. We disagree. Prior Wisconsin opinions… Read more
Hodgkins v. Peterson, 355 F.3d 1048 (7th Cir. 2004) Issue/Holding: In order not to offend the First Amendment, a statute that regulates the time, place, and manner of expression must be (1) content neutral, (2) narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest, and (3) allow for ample alternative channels for the expression. Ward, 491 U.S… Read more
State v. James F. Brienzo, 2003 WI App 203, PFR filed 10/10/03 For Brienzo: Jerome F. Buting Issue/Holding: Prosecution for attempted sexual assault of a child initiated over the Internet isn’t barred by the first amendment. ¶¶23-24, applying State v. Robins, 2002 WI 65, 253 Wis. 2d 298, 646 N.W.2d 287 (permitting prosecution for enticement). Same… Read more
Predick v. O’Connor, 2003 WI App 46 Issue/Holding: Banishment from victims’ county, under harassment injunction, § 813.125, upheld: ¶18 Thus, banishment is not a per se constitutional violation. As the previous discussion demonstrates, there is no exact formula for determining whether a geographic restriction is narrowly tailored. Each case must be analyzed on its own facts, circumstances… Read more
State v. Brian D. Robins, 2002 WI 65, on bypass For Robins: Craig W. Albee Issue: Whether prosecution for child enticement initiated over the Internet violates the first amendment. Holding: The first amendment doesn’t extend to speech that is incidental to or part of the criminal course of conduct. ¶43. The child enticement statute regulates conduct, not speech… Read more
State v. John T. Trochinski, 2002 WI 56, affirming unpublished decision For Trochinski: James L. Fullin, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether § 948.11(2) is unconstitutional because it doesn’t require proof of knowledge of the age of the person to whom harmful materials are displayed (minority being the sole differentiating factor between noncriminal/protected and criminal conduct… Read more
