State v. Robert Billings, 2017AP2272-CR, District 1, 1/15/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Billings sought disclosure of the identity of the confidential informant who supplied information that was used to get a search warrant for his apartment. The circuit court granted his request. The circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion because it didn’t apply the correct legal standard. [continue reading…]
City of Crandon v. Lynda Morris, 2017AP2266, District 3, 1/15/19 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including brief of appellant; respondent didn’t file one….)
The circuit court improperly jumped the gun by ordering Morris’s driver’s license to be revoked for refusal before the 10-day deadline for her to request a refusal hearing. But she never asked for a refusal hearing, and once the deadline to do so passed the circuit court lost competency to undo the revocation—even though the associated OWI 3rd charges were ultimately thrown out after the evidence was suppressed. [continue reading…]
Here are a couple of items on sentencing issues our readers may find interesting. [continue reading…]
State v. Brady R. Adams, 2018AP174-CR, 1/15/19, District 3 (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Noting that no Wisconsin precedent addresses the issue in this case, the court of appeals follows United States v. Bohman, 683 F.3d 861 (7th Cir. 2012) and holds that the suspicion of illegal activity in a place is not enough to transfer that suspicion to anyone who leaves that place such as would justify an investigatory detention. [continue reading…]
State v. Kimberly C. Thomas, 2018AP304-CR, 1/15/19 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
On the morning of her final pretrial, Thomas called her lawyer’s office to say that she just got a job, had to start that day, and couldn’t make the conference. When she didn’t show, she was charged and convicted of bail-jumping. She asserted ineffective assistance of counsel because her lawyer didn’t defend her absence. Also, he was a witness to her bail-jumping, so he should have withdrawn before the case went to trial. [continue reading…]
State v. Javien Cajujuan Pegeese, 2017AP741-CR, petition for review of a per curiam opinion granted 1/15/19; affirmed 5/31/19; case activity (including briefs)
Issue:
Whether the circuit court’s failure to personally insure that the defendant understood each constitutional right waived by his guilty plea entitled him to a Bangert evidentiary hearing to determine whether his plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
State v. Peter J. Hanson, 2016AP2058-CR, petition for review of per curiam opinion granted 1/15/19; case activity (including briefs)
Issues (from the petition for review):
Whether the admission of hearsay statements of a defendant’s deceased wife inculpating him in murder violates his right to confrontation?
Whether trial counsel is ineffective in failing to move to suppress inculpatory statements that the defendant made at a John Doe hearing where he was in custody and not properly Mirandized?
The odds of getting into Harvard are 5.2%. The odds of SCOTUS granting a petition for writ of certiorari are 1.2%–and only .5% if it is filed in forma pauperis. Yet our very own Andy Hinkel just did it. Without a supreme court clinic or an amicus curiae listed on his cert petition, without a filing fee or fancy formatting, Andy, relying on brute intelligence, persuaded SCOTUS to grant cert in State v. Mitchell featured in the post below. Congratulations, Andy. We are thoroughly impressed and rooting for you and your client!!
