Edwards v. Vannoy, USSC No. 19-5807, certiorari granted 5/4/20
Question presented:
Does the Supreme Court’s decision in Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), apply retroactively to cases on federal collateral review?
Like the holding in Ramos itself, the decision in this case will have direct relevance only to practitioners handling federal habeas review of convictions from Louisiana or Oregon, the two jurisdictions that permitted 10-2 guilty verdicts in criminal trials before Ramos invalidated non-unanimous juries.
{ }
Courtesy of Garrett Epps, writing at The Atlantic, “A Citizen’s Guide to SCOTUS Live”:
America’s typical amusements—March Madness, the NBA playoffs, Major League Baseball Opening Day, the U.S. Open, the Masters—have suddenly disappeared. Just in time, though, a new Big League debuts tomorrow [May 4], offering a welcome spectacle of bare-knuckle combat, vicious competition, taunts, and trash talk.
The Ultimate Fighting Championship will return on May 9. Until then, the United States Supreme Court is the only show in town.
Read the entire piece here.
Over at the Gray Lady, Adam Liptak explains how “revolutionary” it is for the Court to do live broadcasts of oral argument. Perhaps, as someone said, it is not difficult to be a revolutionary when revolution has already broken out and is in spate. But if Covid-19 spurs more such salutary changes to the legal system, then we should take the good where we can find it.
{ }
State v. Phyllis M. Schwersenska, 2018AP1619-CR, District 4, 4/30/20 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Schwersenska was convicted of embezzling money from a joint bank account she held with her daughter, H.R. The court of appeals holds trial counsel wasn’t ineffective for failing to raise the defense that, as joint owner of the account, none of the money in the account belonged solely to H.R. and so she can’t be guilty of theft from H.R. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 27, 2020
Langlade County v. D.J.W., 2020 WI 41, reversing an unpublished court of appeals opinion, 4/24/20; case activity
Wisconsin’s involuntary commitment rate is higher than that of any other state–by a long shot. According to a report for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services, the annual commitment rate among states ranges from 0.23 to 43.8 per 1,000 adults with serious mental illness. The average is 9.4 per 1,000, with Wisconsin at 43.8. SCOW’s decision in this case can reduce the number of fait accompli commitment hearings–but only if defense lawyers invoke it and trial courts take it seriously. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 23, 2020
Ramos v. Louisiana, USSC No. 18-5924, 2020 WL 1906545, 4/20/20, reversing State v. Ramos, 231 So. 3d 44 (La. Ct. Apps. 2017); Scotusblog page (including links to briefs and commentary)
The holding in this case has no relevance to Wisconsin practitioners, or indeed anyone outside of Louisiana or Oregon–the only two jurisdictions permitting 10-2 guilty verdicts in criminal trials. The Sixth Amendment requires unanimity in federal trials, and our state supreme court has long held the Wisconsin Constitution confers the same right. See Holland v. State, 91 Wis. 2d 134, 138, 280 N.W.2d 288 (1979). So if you’re interested only in the impact on your practice, there is none, and you can stop reading now. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 23, 2020
United States v. Dustin Caya, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 19-2469, 4/16/20
Caya was on extended supervision. Police developed reasonable suspicion to search his home, and duly did so under § 302.113(7r), which was created by 2013 Wisconsin Act 79. Caya argues that statute violates the Fourth Amendment. The Seventh Circuit rejects the claim. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 23, 2020
State v. Quaid Q. Belk, 2019AP982-CR, District 1, 4/21/20 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Belk moved for a new trial based on multiple allegations of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The circuit court denied the motion without a hearing, but the court of appeals sends the case back for a hearing on one of the claims. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 23, 2020
State v. Brandin L. McConochie, 2019AP2149-CR, District 2, 4/22/20 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
McConochie pulled his vehicle alongside Amish buggies and exposed his genitals to the occupants within. He pled no contest to 3 counts of lewd and lascivious behavior as a repeater. As a condition of probation, the court banished him a delineated area where Amish live. McConochie argued that banishment violated his constitutional right to travel. [continue reading…]
{ }
