by admin
on November 30, 2019
State v. Chris K. Feller, 2019AP318, 11/27/19, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
This appeal poses an interesting question of law: whether the justification defense available in certain civil forfeiture actions applies where a driver exceeds the speed limit in order to get away from another driver who is dangerously tailgating him on the freeway. See State v. Brown, 107 Wis. 2d 44, 318 N.W.2d 370. The court of appeals contorts the undisputed facts in order to duck the issue. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on November 30, 2019
State v. Jonathan A. Ortiz-Rodriguez, 2018AP2401-CR, District 1, 11/26/19, (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The State charged the defendant with repeated sexual assault of a child, which carries a 25-year minimum term of initial confinement. Trial counsel told the defendant that the State had offered to recommend 5 to 8 years if he would plead to one count of child sexual assault. But then at sentencing the State argued for 20 years IC and 20 years ES. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on November 24, 2019
Read the NYTimes new article: “Imagine Being on Trial. With Exonerating Evidence Trapped on Your Phone. Public defenders lack access to gadgets and software that could keep their clients out of jail.”
{ }
by admin
on November 24, 2019
Appellate lawyers, this one’s for you! According to a new article in Stanford Law Review, there are 4 types of ineffective assistance of counsel claims, and Strickland‘s two-part test applies to only one (that’s right one) of them. Read this article and help our courts put Strickland in its proper place.
{ }
by admin
on November 24, 2019
Quite possibly, yes. Learn more in this new article by a couple of Harvard professors.
{ }
by admin
on November 22, 2019
La Crosse County v. J.M.A., 2018AP1258, 11/21/19, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
J.M.A. appeals his recommitment under ch. 51. He argues the psychiatrist who was the sole witness at his trial provided only conclusory testimony on dangerousness; the court of appeals disagrees. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on November 21, 2019
On November 20, 2019, the court of appeals ordered the publication of the following criminal law related decisions:
State v. Keith H. Shoeder, 2019 WI App 60 (a riding lawn mower is a “motor vehicle for purposes of the OWI statute)
State v. Larry W. Olson, 2019 WI App 61 (the 72-hour filing deadline for a petition to revoke NGI conditional release is mandatory)
State v. Jamie Lane Stephenson, 2019 WI App 63 (state not required to have expert opinion on risk at ch. 980 discharge hearing).
{ }
by admin
on November 20, 2019
Here is a story about a lawyer whose pants ignited during his closing argument at a criminal arson trial. He rushed from the courtroom to extinguish the flames and denied that he had staged a stunt. He faces possible discipline.
{ }
