Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

1. Certificates of compliance

Attention appellate practitioners: We are pleased to present this guest post by Andrea Cornwall, Regional Attorney Manager if the SPD’s Milwaukee Appellate Office, about the imminent change in the rules governing references to victims in appellate brief. You may have received some notification of Supreme Court Order 14-01 amending the rules of appellate procedure was entered in… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Loren H. Laufman v. North Central Power Co., Inc., 2012AP2116, District 3 (per curiam; not eligible for publication or citation). Normally, On Point would not trouble its readers with a per curiam decision involving insurance coverage issues.  This one, however, penalizes parties for violations of Wisconsin’s Rules of Appellate Procedure, so appellate lawyers of all… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Nielsen sanction after show cause (summary order, not citable), on remand from State v. Nielsen, 2011 WI 94 Sanction for Incomplete Brief Appendix  The appellant’s brief argued that the circuit court failed to fulfill the mandate articulated in State v. Gallion, 2004 WI 42, 270 Wis. 2d 535, 678 N.W.2d 197, to explain the rationale for… Read More

{ 0 comments }

In the Matter of Sanctions in: State v. Gregory K. Nielsen, 2011 WI 94, remanding sanctions order; for State Public Defender: Joseph N. Ehmann; case activity; subsequent history: sanction re-imposed on remand Monetary sanction summarily ordered by court of appeals against appellate counsel for allegedly violating appendix-content rule reversed, with following “suggestion” for procedure to be followed in… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Michael E. Ballenger, 2010AP664-CR, District 3, 11/16/10 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Ballenger: Ryan D. Lister; Ballenger BiC; State’s Resp. Appellate Procedure – Sanction Ballenger’s brief’s appendix does not include any portion of the suppression motion hearing transcript—neither deputy Campbell’s testimony nor the court’s factual findings or reasoning for… Read More

{ 0 comments }

court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Voeller: Steven G. Richards; BiC; Resp.; Reply Counsel – Sanction – Appendix ¶9 n. 3: Contrary to the State’s certification, the appendix does not include the trial court’s findings or opinion. The transcript of the oral findings and opinion should have been included in the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Patrick M. Zurkowski, No. 2009AP929-CR, District III, 6/22/10 court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Zurkowski: Michael J. Fairchild; BiC; Resp. 1st-Degree Intentional Homicide – Sufficient Evidence, Intent ¶13      That Zurkowski killed June through a combination of repeated blows and cutting her tongue with a ceramic object he crammed in her… Read More

{ 0 comments }

S.C. Johnson v. Milton E. Morris, 2010 WI App 6, PFR filed 12/30/09 Issue/Holding: ¶5 n. 1: We note that neither Russell’s nor Buske’s appellate counsel properly cite to the record. Record cites are often missing. An appellate court is improperly burdened where briefs fail to consistently and accurately cite to the record. Meyer v… Read More

{ 0 comments }