by admin
on September 14, 2023
Brown County v. Z.W.L., 2022AP2201, District 3, 9/12/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (briefs not available)
In yet another hearsay-based sufficiency challenge to a Chapter 51 commitment, Z.W.L. (“Zeb”) succeeds because the circuit court relied on inadmissible hearsay and no other evidence established that Zeb was dangerous. Specifically, while Zeb made admissible “party-opponent” statements to a crisis worker and a police officer, the county failed to call either direct witness to Zeb’s statements and instead relied on two witnesses who read about Zeb’s history. While the circuit court relied on a case manager’s testimony because “this is what case managers are supposed to do” and “to me, that’s an exception to any of the hearsay rules,” the court of appeals disagrees. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 13, 2023
State v. B.W., 2022AP1329, District I, 9/12/23, PFR granted 12/11/23; affirmed 6/27/2024; (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (briefs not available)
In yet another TPR appeal presenting an alleged miscommunication of the dispositional burden of proof, COA’s close read of the record evidence prevents B.W. from obtaining a requested hearing.
[continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 11, 2023
State v. Jeffrey S. Clemons, 2020AP1450-CR, 9/6/23, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (briefs not available).
Applying an almost-insurmountable standard of review, COA concludes there was sufficient evidence to support the circuit court’s finding that Clemons violated an obstructing ordinance.
[continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 8, 2023
Brown County D.H.S. v. A.K., 2023AP730, 9/6/23, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (briefs not available).
A.K. concedes that the circuit court properly exercised its discretion at this dispositional hearing, but argues that the order must still be reversed as there was no direct evidence from the proposed adoptive resource. COA rejects that argument and affirms.
[continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 8, 2023
Robert James Pope , Jr. v. Warden Paul Kemper, 21-CV-0346 (E.D. Wis. 9/1/23).
In a satisfying–and long-delayed–defense win, Judge Ludwig of the Eastern District acknowledges that when a prisoner, previously abandoned by counsel, is then forced to appeal his conviction without having transcripts made available to him, that procedure violates “clearly established” US Constitutional law.
[continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 7, 2023
Waukesha County DHHS v. M.S., 2022AP2065, District 2, 9/6/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (briefs not available)
M.S. (“Martin”) spent nearly 22 years committed under Chapter 51. In 2021, the county switched course and sought and received a permanent guardianship and protective placement under Chapters 54 and 55. Martin challenged whether he was a proper subject for protective placement, relying “quite heavily” on Fond du Lac County v. Helen E.F., 2012 WI 50, 340 Wis. 2d 500, 814 N.W.2d 179. The court of appeals refers to Martin’s argument as a “red herring” and affirms, holding that the county met its burden to prove Martin was a proper subject for protective placement under Chapter 55. (Op., ¶6). [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 6, 2023
Price County v. C.W., 2023AP18-FT, District III, 9/6/23 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Under the specific facts of this case, COA holds that the County was not required to call a medical expert at “Clara’s” protective placement hearing and affirms.
[continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 5, 2023
State v. Michael A. Wilson, 2022AP1099, District IV, 8/31/23, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (briefs not available)
Despite some procedural quirks, the Court of Appeals wastes no time in affirming what turns out to be a relatively straightforward refusal conviction.
[continue reading…]
{ }
