Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

§ 940.31(1)(b), Kidnapping — Sufficiency of Evidence — “Confinement”

State v. Charles J. Burroughs, 2002 WI App 18
For Burroughs: William F. Mross

Issue/Holding: The term “confine” has been defined under § 940.30 (false imprisonment), to mean compelled deprivation of free movement. ¶18. Therefore, the definition of “confine” in Wis JI-Criminal No. 1275 applies to kidnapping. ¶19. Applying that definition: physical force isn’t essential; nor is the victim required to undertake the risk presented by an opportunity to escape. The jury was entitled to find confinement based on evidence that defendant raised his fists at and threatened to shoot the victim: “¶22. Based on the evidence presented at trial, we conclude that a reasonable jury could find that Burroughs confined Sharon by depriving her of her freedom of movement and compelling her to remain where she did not wish to remain. We therefore uphold the jury’s conviction.” ¶22.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment