7th Circuit decision Habeas – Procedural Default “Adequate presentation of a claim requires a petitioner to present both the operative facts and the legal principles that control each claim to the state judiciary.” (Quoting, Stevens v. McBride, 489 F.3d 883, 894 (7th Cir. 2007).) Suh procedurally defaulted his theory of recusal based on the appearance… Read more
A. Judicial bias
State v. Mark D. Jensen, 2011 WI App 3; prior history: 2007 WI 26; for Jensen: Terry W. Rose, Christopher William Rose, Michael D. Cicchini; case activity; (Jensen BiC not posted); State Resp.; Jensen Reply Confrontation – Generally The Confrontation Clause regulates testimonial statements only, such that nontestimonial statements are excludable only under hearsay and other evidence-rule ¶¶22-26, citing Giles v… Read more
State v. James Robert Thomas, No. 2010AP332-CR, District III, 7/27/10 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Thomas: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate; BiC; Resp.; Reply The sentencing court exhibited objective bias, requiring resentencing, when it imposed the maximum on sentencing after revocation, given the court’s threat when it placed Thomas on… Read more
State v. Brian K. Goodson, 2009 WI App 107 For Goodson: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶9 Objective bias can exist in two situations. The first is where there is the appearance of bias, Gudgeon, 295 Wis. 2d 189, ¶¶23-24. “[T]he appearance of bias offends constitutional due process principles whenever a reasonable person—taking into… Read more
Recusal – Judicial Bias – Prejudgment of Issue: Effectuated Threat to Impose Maximum upon Revocation
State v. Brian K. Goodson, 2009 WI App 107 For Goodson: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: The reconfinement judge should have recused himself, given that at original disposition he threatened to impose the maximum if the defendant was returned to court on revocation; State v. Gudgeon, 2006 WI App 143, deemed controlling: ¶12 The same… Read more
State ex rel. Adrian T. Hipp v. Murray, 2007 WI App 202, affirmed, 2008 WI 67, ¶48 n. 7 (reconsideration denied, 2008 WI 118) Pro se Issue/Holding: ¶13 n. 4: We are disturbed by Reddin’s presumption to give, and Judge Murray’s acquiescence to receive, Reddin’s ex parte advice about the scope of Hipp’s ability to have issued subpoenas for the… Read more
State v. Justin D. Gudgeon, 2006 WI App 143, PFR filed 7/14/06 For Gudgeon: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶10 A biased tribunal, like the lack of counsel, constitutes a “structural error.” See id. at 8; Franklin v. McCaughtry, 398 F.3d 955, 961 (7th Cir. 2005); State v. Carprue, 2004 WI 111, ¶59, 274 Wis. 2d 656, 683 N.W.2d… Read more
State v. Roberto Vargas Rodriguez, 2006 WI App 163, PFR filed 8/28/06 For Rodriguez: Donna L. Hintze, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether, given the trial judge’s statement at sentencing that defendant’s counsel had in fact provided competent representation, established prejudgment of the issue such that recusal was required for the subsequent postconviction assertion of ineffective assistance of… Read more
