by admin
on June 18, 2021
State v. Jordan Alexander Lickes, 2021 WI 60, affirming a published court of appeals opinion, 2019AP1272-CR, 6/15/21, case activity (including briefs)
In State v. Ozuna, SCOW held that a young offender’s violation of any court-imposed conditions of probation renders expungement unavailable. Here, Lickes argued that: (1) the same rule does not apply to conditions imposed by the DOC, and (2) the circuit court has the discretion to find that an offender has satisfied the DOC’s conditions even if he has violated one or more of them and especially when, as in this case, the DOC itself requests expungement. In a split decision, SCOW rejects both arguments, making expungement a pipe dream for most young offenders. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on June 16, 2021
State v. Jacob Richard Beyer, 2021 WI 59, 6/15/21, on certification from the court of appeals; case activity (including briefs)
On Point is proud to present a guest post by Tom Aquino of the Madison appellate office:
A unanimous Wisconsin Supreme Court holds: “we will not permit parties to stipulate to every fact that satisfies a defendant’s guilt
and the defendant’s guilt as well.” (
¶20 (emphasis in original)). That is, a defendant can stipulate to facts from which a court can find the defendant guilty, but the defendant cannot stipulate to the finding of guilt. Stipulating to facts from which a court can find guilt might still be considered a trial (see below). But stipulating to the defendant’s
guilt is not a trial and is tantamount to a guilty plea. The distinction is important because a guilty plea generally waives all non-jurisdictional errors except those expressly preserved by statute or rule such as occurs with suppression issues per Wis. Stat.
§ 971.31(10).
[continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on June 14, 2021
State v. Daniel J. Rejholec, 2021 WI App 45; case activity (including briefs)
Police arrested Rejholec on suspicion of sexual assault of a minor. After receiving the Miranda admonitions, Rejholec agreed to speak with a detective. The interrogation was recorded on video. That video reveals the detective’s aggressive deployment of the so-called Reid technique: a method of extracting confessions (be they true or false). The detective bullies, cajoles and wheedles until he gets what he’s after: a confession. Oh, the detective also lies, floridly. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on June 14, 2021
Eau Claire County DHS v. S.E., 2021 WI 56, affirming a published court of appeals opinion, 2019AP894, 6/10/21, case activity
In a 4-3 decision, SCOW holds that a 2018 amendment to the TPR statute, which imposed a more exacting timeframe for parents to preserve their parental rights, applied to a CHIPS order entered in 2016 when the statutory timeframe was more lenient. So much for the plain language of the statute and due process. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on June 14, 2021
State v. M.D.M., 2021 WI App 42; case activity
In 2014, the State filed petitions charging M.D.M., a juvenile, with multiple counts of delinquency. He was found incompetent but likely to regain, so the court suspended these cases. In 2016, the State filed a new petition charging M.D.M. with 1 count of delinquency. This time M.D.M. was found competent to proceed, so the State wanted to resume prosecution of his 2014 case as well. This published opinion establishes the procedure for recalling a case after a juvenile regains competency. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on June 14, 2021
Sheboygan County v. M.J.M., 2020AP1744, 6/9/21, District 2 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This is new. M.J.M. appealed a recommitment order which expired during the course of his appeal. The usual kerfuffle regarding mootness ensued but this time (unlike here and here) the court of appeals acknowledged that the issue of whether recommitment may be dismissed as moot was pending before SCOW in Sauk v. S.A.M, and so reached the merits of this case. It then found sufficient evidence of dangerousness based on threats M.J.M. made during his expiring commitment and because of what he would do if treatment were withdrawn. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on June 13, 2021
According to the ABA, the Arkansas Supreme Court has suspended a judge for his impatient, discourteous, and rude behavior toward public defenders. He left the bench in the middle of questioning by a PD, refused to allow a PD to make her record regarding an objection, made alarming faces in court, and generally bullied them. The supreme court not only suspended him without pay for 30 days, it ordered him to hire a life coach to help address his intimidating behavior. Read more here.
{ }
United States v. Cooley, USSC No. 19-1414, 141 S.Ct. 1638 (June 1, 2021), vacating and remanding 919 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir. 2019); Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary)
A unanimous Court holds that tribal police officers have the power to search and temporarily detain non-Indians suspected of breaking federal or state laws within reservations. [continue reading…]
{ }
