State v. Jay G. Jacomet, 2021AP2186-CR, District 2, 10/12/22 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Under the totality of the circumstances, the police had a reasonable basis to suspect Jacomet was operating while intoxicated, so detaining him for field sobriety testing was lawful. [continue reading…]
State v. Annika S. Christensen, 2022AP500, 9/9/22, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Christensen was one of two occupants of a parked car after dark. A police truck approached, parked close behind her, and shined its takedown light into the car. At least one officer got out of the car and knocked on the window. In a carefully-reasoned, well-explained decision, the court of appeals affirms the circuit court’s holding that Christensen was seized at this moment, and that the police lacked reasonable suspicion for that seizure. [continue reading…]
State v. Terry L. Hibbard, 2022 WI App 53; case activity (including briefs)
In a decision that allows for a sweeping expansion of aiding and abetting prosecutions in Len Bias cases, the court of appeals holds that a person assisting only a buyer a drug transaction could also be prosecuted for reckless homicide if the buyer dies from using the drug because any act aiding the buyer in getting the drugs also necessarily aids the seller in making the delivery. [continue reading…]
Juneau County D.H.S. v. R.M., 2022AP1260, 9/29/22, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
R.M. appeals the termination of her parental rights to her son, M.M. [continue reading…]
Sauk County v. W.B., 2021AP322, 9/9/22, District 4, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication; case activity
This decision should strike fear in the hearts of those who have executed a healthcare power of attorney or who hold an HPOA for a loved one. According to the court of appeals, when a court declares a person incapacitated and activates his HPOA, his agent may admit him to a nursing home. But the incapacitated person retains the power to revoke his HPOA and leave the nursing home. To prevent this result, a court must order a guardianship and protective placement for him. [continue reading…]
Clark County v. R.F., 2022AP481, District 4, 9/1/22, (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
Too bad this decision isn’t recommended for publication. The court of appeals reversed an order continuing a ch. 55 protective placement because the County failed to offer clear and convincing evidence that the continuation of protective placement would provide the least restrictive environment consistent with R.F.’s needs. And because the County failed to respond to R.F.’s requested remedy, the court of appeals granted it. It remanded the case with directions to order the County to transition R.F. to protective services. [continue reading…]
Clark County v. R.D.S., 2022AP229, District 4, 8/18/22; (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
Ch. 55 practitioners take note! This is one of a few Wisconsin decisions reversing the continuation of a ch. 55 protective placement due to insufficient evidence. Here, the County failed to prove that due to R.D.S.’s disability he was incapable of caring for himself and posed a substantial risk of serious harm to himself or others. And because the County did not address R.D.S.’s requested remedy (an order allowing him to live with his parents), the court of appeals granted it. [continue reading…]
State v. A.G., 2022AP652, two petitions for review of unpublished court of appeals opinions granted 10/11/22; reversed, 2023 WI 61; case activity
Issues for review:
From the State’s petition: Whether A.G., the father who lost his parental rights, knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily pled “no contest” to grounds for termination of his rights.
From the GAL’s petition: Whether Bangert‘s procedure governing motions to withdraw a criminal guilty plea should apply rigidly to TPR proceedings.
Also from the GAL’s petition. Whether a parent loses his right to appeal after failing to attend a remand hearing without excuse.
