State v. Christopher L. Gee, 2019 WI App 31; case activity (including briefs) Christopher Gee was accused of sexually assaulting two women at knifepoint; one of the women had come to Gee’s apartment building because someone there had agreed to pay her for sex. He admitted to police that he’d had sex with this second… Read more
J. Rebuttal evidence
State v. Mychael R. Hatcher, 2015AP297-CR, District 3, 8/16/16 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Hatcher was convicted of sexually assaulting an intoxicated person, obstructing an officer, and bail-jumping. This 38-page court of appeals decision rejects claims that the trial court erred in refusing to accept Hatcher’s guilty plea, admitting expert testimony during… Read more
State v. Brent T. Novy, 2013 WI 23, affirming 2012 WI App 10; case activity Evidence excluded from state’s case-in-chief because of discovery violation is admissible as rebuttal evidence The trial court excluded the state from presenting fingerprint evidence in its case-in-chief because the state failed to properly disclose the evidence under Wis. Stat. §… Read more
on review of published decision; for Novy: Bridget E. Boyle; case activity Rebuttal – Evidence Excluded from Case-in-Chief for Discovery Violation / Sleeping Juror Issues (Composed by On Point) caution: issue-identification necessarily speculative; check case activity link after briefs filed for verification of issues: 1. a) Whether evidence ruled inadmissible during the State’s case-in-chief as a sanction for violating… Read more
State v. Brent T. Novy, 2012 WI App 10 (recommended for publication), petition for review granted, 6/13/12; for Novy: Joseph George Easton; case activity Rebuttal – Evidence Excluded from Case-in-Chief for Discovery Violation Expert witness testimony, excluded from the State’s case-in-chief as a sanction failure to identify the witness during discovery, was admissible on rebuttal to attack… Read more
State v. Juan M. Sandoval, 2009 WI App 61, PFR filed 5/6/09 For Sandoval: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: The State need not disclose bona fide rebuttal evidence, the test for which turns on whether the evidence “only became necessary at rebuttal” (as opposed to whether it would have been admissible or useful… Read more
State v. Richard N. Konkol, 2002 WI App 174 For Konkol: Brian Hough Issue/Holding: The proper test for admissibility of rebuttal evidence isn’t whether it could have been admitted in, or would have been useful to, the state’s case-in-chief, but whether it meets new facts put in by the defendant. ¶¶18-19. ¶18 Thus, the only… Read more
