If you dream of arguing a case to SCOTUS, this new study may dash your hopes. It suggests that SCOTUS doesn’t seriously consider cases that lack an “amicus wrangler” (someone to recruit the right amici) and an “amicus whisperer” (someone to coordinate the wrangled amici’s messages). Just one amicus brief by any ole lawyer won’t do the trick. Think several amici–each one represented by a member of a select group of SCOTUS specialists. Turns out they shape the court’s docket more than anyone. The authors attempt to defend this clubby practice as being very helpful to the modern court. See if they persuade you.
State v. Isiah O. Smith, 2015AP1645-CR, 11/15/16, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Two guys walk into an apartment complex and leave a short time later. One carried a gun and a cell phone; the other a cell phone. They got into a car belonging to a friend of the guy carrying only the cell phone and drove off. A surveillance video captured these movements but not the shooting death that occurred in the complex at about the same time. Was there sufficient evidence to convict the guy holding just the cell phone of 2nd degree reckless homicide as a party to a crime? [continue reading…]
State v. Tydis Trinard Odom, 2015AP2525-CR; District 2, 11/9/16; certification refused 1/9/17; case activity (including briefs)
Issue:
Does the imposition of multiple DNA surcharges constitute “potential punishment” under WIS. STAT. § 971.08(1)(a) such that a court’s failure to advise a defendant about them before taking his or her plea establishes a prima facie showing that the defendant’s plea was unknowing, involuntary, and unintelligent?
Sheboygan County v. J.L.H., 2016AP461, District 2, 11/9/16;(1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This case raises an issue now pending in SCOW: what makes someone a “proper subject for treatment” under §51.20(1)? J.L.H. has schizophrenia, intermittent explosive disorder, and a mental disability. There is no dispute that he is mentally ill and dangerous to himself. The question is whether he is “proper subject for treatment” given that medication only controls his symptoms; it does not treat his illness. According to the court of appeals . . . [continue reading…]
Winnebago County v. J.M., 2016AP619, District 2, 11/9/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication), petition for review granted 5/15/17, affirmed, 2018 WI 37; case activity
J.M.’s lawyer didn’t secure civilian clothes for him to wear at his ch. 51 recommitment hearing, so he appeared before the jury in his prison greens (sans the shackles, at least; and the stun belt wasn’t visible to the jury). The court of appeals rejects the claim J.M.’s lawyer was ineffective for failing to make a modest outlay at the local Goodwill to purchase J.M. an outfit without the negative stigmata and for failing to ask for a curative instruction. [continue reading…]
City of Appleton v. Jacob Anthony Vandenberg, 2015AP2649, District 3, 11/8/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Because he entered a plea to OWI, first offense, Vandenberg forfeited his arguments that police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop him for operating while intoxicated or hit-and-run under § 346.69, and the court of appeals declines to disregard the guilty-plea-waiver rule. [continue reading…]
Professors O’Hear and Wheelock surveyed over 800 registered voters in Wisconsin about their attitudes toward punishment, rehabilitation and reform. See how public attitudes toward sentencing vary by race, gender and political party affiliation here.
Here’s an interesting new study on the consequences of courts imposing prison sentences that are much longer than a person’s natural lifespan.
