On September 29, 2021, the court of appeals ordered the publication of the following criminal-law related decision:
State v. Joel R. Davis, 2021 WI App 65 (police unlawfully prolonged traffic stop to research motorist’s bond conditions).
State v. Santiago B. Rios, 2020AP2132-CR, was slated to be decided today, but it wasn’t. Instead, the court of appeals issued an order directing the state (represented here by the district attorney’s office) to file a respondent’s brief. [continue reading…]
State v. D.W., 2021AP1290, District 1, 9/28/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court properly exercised its discretion in terminating D.W.’s parental rights because the court considered all the relevant factors under § 48.426(3) in reaching its decision. [continue reading…]
State v. Kody R. Kohn, 2020AP2147-CR, District 2, 9/22/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Kohn argues the circuit court erred in: 1) denying his motion to suppress evidence obtained from the blood drawn from him after his arrest; 2) excluding exhibits he wanted to use to cross examine the state’s blood analyst; and 3) rejecting his motion to dismiss a bail jumping charge. The court of appeals affirms all the circuit court’s decisions. [continue reading…]
Outagamie County v. D.G.M., 2020AP967, District 3, 9/21/21 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The evidence at the final hearing on the petition to commit D.G.M. under ch. 51 was sufficient to establish all the statutory elements and D.G.M.’s incompetence to refuse medication. [continue reading…]
State v. Manuel Garcia, 2021 WI 76, 9/24/21, affirming a published decision of the court of appeals; case activity (including briefs)
As explained in our post on the published decision, the court of appeals held that a defendant’s voluntary statement obtained in violation of Miranda can’t be used in the state’s case-in-chief, even for impeachment if the defendant elects to testify. The supreme court granted the state’s petition for review. Justice Hagedorn withdrew from consideration of the case, and the remaining justices were evenly divided. Thus, the court of appeals decision is affirmed.
State v. Richard Michael Arrington, 2019AP2065, review of a published court of appeals decision granted 9/14/21, case activity (including briefs)
Issues (from the state’s PFR; response here):
Did Arrington prove that his counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress the CI’s recordings and testimony on Sixth Amendment grounds?
Did Arrington prove that the State violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel?
State v. Valiant M. Green, 2019AP2150, petition for review of a summary order of the court of appeals granted 9/14/21; case activity (including briefs)
Issue presented (from the petition):
Did the affidavit in support of that search warrant fail to state probable cause to believe that Mr. Green had committed a crime and thus require suppression of the blood test result? [continue reading…]
