by admin
on April 25, 2017
Justice Gorsuch’s nomination generated a lot of press about the Chevron doctrine–the idea that, under federal law, courts must defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of a statute that it is charged with enforcing. See e.g. this SCOTUSblog post and this NYTimes article. With Gorsuch confirmed, pundits expect SCOTUS to take on the “administrative state” soon. Looks like SCOW will beat it to the punch at least with respect to courts and administrative agencies in Wisconsin. Yesterday, SCOW granted a petition for review in Tetra Tech EC, Inc v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue and took the unusual step of asking the parties to brief an additional issue. Here it is:
Does the practice of deferring to agency interpretations of statutes comport with Article VII, Section 2 of the Wisconsin Constitution, which vests the judicial power in the unified court system?
{ }
by admin
on April 24, 2017
State v. Lemberger, 2017 WI 39, April 20, 2017, affirming a one-judge court of appeals decision; 2017AP1452; case activity (including briefs)
The supreme court declares Lemberger’s legal claim “unsettled,” and thus holds his trial counsel did not perform deficiently by not raising it. The court’s opinion, however, fails to present the actual substance of the claim. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 21, 2017
Nelson v. Colorado, USSC No. 15-526, (April 20, 2017), reversing and remanding Colorado v. Nelson, 364 P.3d 866 (2015); SCOTUSblog page (inlcuding links to briefs and commentary).
This decision establishes that a State cannot force an exonerated defendant to file a civil suit and prove his innocence by clear and convincing evidence in order to recover costs, fees, and restitution he paid upon conviction. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 21, 2017
So asks Orin Kerr in a post at the Volokh Conspiracy about a decision from the Fifth Circuit, Alexander v. City of Round Rock, 2107 WL 1393702 (April 18, 2017), involving a § 1983 lawsuit against police alleging violations of the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 21, 2017
This week Pacific Standard magazine reported on some interesting new research. Jurors are more likely to convict a person accused of a gruesome crime if they are shown color photographs of the victim rather than black and white photographs. Read more here.
{ }
by admin
on April 21, 2017
This week Wired ran an op-ed arguing that courts should stop using algorithms to set bail and sentence defendants until some ground rules are set. Yes, it discusses Compas and State v. Loomis. But beyond that it describes what could happen if courts move from using simple algorithms to using deep learning algorithms known as neural networks to sentence someone. Here is an excerpt from the article:
Consider a scenario in which the defense attorney calls a developer of a neural-network-based risk assessment tool to the witness stand to challenge the “high risk” score that could affect her client’s sentence. On the stand, the engineer could tell the court how the neural network was designed, what inputs were entered, and what outputs were created in a specific case. However, the engineer could not explain the software’s decision-making process. With these facts, or lack thereof, how does a judge weigh the validity of a risk-assessment tool if she cannot understand its decision-making process? How could an appeals court know if the tool decided that socioeconomic factors, a constitutionally dubious input, determined a defendant’s risk to society? Following the reasoning in Loomis, the court would have no choice but to abdicate a part of its responsibility to a hidden decision-making process.
{ }
by admin
on April 20, 2017
State v. Steven T. Delap, 2016AP2196-CR, 4/20/17, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication), petition for review granted 7/18/17, affirmed, 2018 WI 64; case activity (including briefs)
Police tried to arrest Delap outside his home on warrants for fleeing from a couple of traffic stops, but when they approached and said “stop, police,” Delap fled into his home. The police followed and arrested him inside. (¶¶3-6). Delap’s challenge to his arrest is no more successful than his attempt to flee. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 20, 2017
State v. Joel Maurice , 2016AP633-CR, 4/18/17, District 1 (unpublished); case activity (including briefs)
Maurice presented 7 issues for review, which the court of appeals rejected with a scant tablespoon of law. This 32-page opinion reads like a summary of trial testimony and is probably not worth your time unless you happen to be working on one of the issues or you want to see how many ways the court of appeals can reformulate the “prejudice” prong of Strickland’s test for ineffective assistance of counsel. First, here is a rundown of the issues: [continue reading…]
{ }
