Question presented:
Whether 18 U.S.C. 16(b), as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act’s provisions governing an alien’s removal from the United States, is unconstitutionally vague.
Dane County DHS v. C.N., 2016AP1472-1473, District 4, 9/29/16 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
C.N. argued that in considering the best of her children the circuit court placed too much weight on her lengthy separation from her children and not enough weight on the progress she had made toward meeting the conditions of return. Unfortunately, the standard of review–whether the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion–doomed her appeal. [continue reading…]
Question presented:
Colorado, like many states, imposes various monetary penalties when a person is convicted of a crime. But Colorado appears to be the only state that does not refund these penalties when a conviction is reversed. Rather, Colorado requires defendants to prove their innocence by clear and convincing evidence to get their money back.
The Question Presented is whether this requirement is consistent with due process.
State v. Kenneth M. Asboth, Jr., 2015AP2052-CR, 9/29/16, District 4 (not recommended for publication); petition for review granted 1/9/17; affirmed 2017 WI 76; case activity (including briefs)
Police suspected Kenneth Asboth in a bank robbery. They received a tip that he would be at a storage facility, and converged there, where they arrested him. They also decided to seize the car he had been driving, which was parked in the lane between storage sheds. Once the car was at the police station, officers searched it, finding evidence linking Asboth to the robbery. The trial court denied suppression, holding that the car was validly impounded, and that an inventory search was thus permitted. [continue reading…]
Are you troubled by the recent erosion of the Fourth Amendment? Do you want to protect your home from police intrusions? Two law professors have an ingenious solution: The Fourth Amendment Security System LAWn sign. Seriously. They are available for purchase. Click here for more details.
How many more years would SCOW have to work to match the output of the Iowa and Minnesota Supreme Courts? What hinders SCOW’s productivity? Today’s edition of SCOWstats ponders these and other riddles of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
SCOTUS has already filled almost half of its docket for the 2016-2017 term. Click here for a sneak peek at the civil and criminal cases it is set to decide.
R.J.M. v. M.R.H., 2016AP1307, 9/22/2016, District 4 (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
M.R.H. appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son, arguing that the jury during the grounds phase should not have heard (1) that he had previously been willing to voluntarily terminate his rights or (2) that his son wanted to be adopted by his stepfather. The court of appeals calls this evidence “problematic” but holds its admission harmless. [continue reading…]
