Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

a. Binding authority

State v. Jesse J. Delebreau, 2014 WI App 21, petition for review granted, 5/23/14, affirmed, 2015 WI 55; case activity You remember State v. Forbush, 2011 WI 25, 332 Wis. 2d 620, 796 N.W.2d 741? That’s the one that considered whether Montejo v. Louisiana, 556 U.S. 778 (2009), upended the Wisconsin rule that police may not question… Read More

{ 0 comments }

OWI – probable cause to administer PBT

Dane County v. Steven D. Koehn, 2012AP1718, District 4, 1/10/13 Court of appeals decision (1 judge; ineligible for publication); case activity Motion to suppress evidence of intoxication properly denied because arresting officer had probable cause to administer a preliminary breath test. The court of appeals rejects Koehn’s claims that the officer’s failure to testify about… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Christopher J. Felton, 2012 WI App 114 (recommended for publication); case activity Search & Seizure – PBT – Probable Cause  Notwithstanding that Felton passed field sobriety tests, probable cause existed to administer a preliminary breath test. ¶8        This section does not require that the officer have probable cause to arrest a driver for drunk… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. David W. Stevens, 2012 WI 97, affirming unpublished decision; case activity Miranda-Edwards Rule – Invocation of Counsel, Initiation of Contact by Suspect Where an in-custody suspect invokes his right to counsel and interrogation immediately ceases, but the suspect himself then initiates a request to continue the interrogation, the police may proceed with questioning if fresh Miranda warnings are given and validly waived. Edwards v… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Confrontation – Expert Testimony

Sandy Williams v. Illinois, USSC No. 10-8505, 6/18/12, affirming People v. Williams, 238 Ill. 2d 125, 939 N.E. 268 A split Court (4-1-4) upholds against Confrontation objection, admissibility of expert testimony that a DNA profile, produced by a different lab, matched Williams’ profile. Because the rationale favoring admissibility doesn’t earn a clear majority of votes, the opinion… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Question Presented (from cert petition):  In Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (2010), this Court held that criminal defendants receive ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment when their attorneys fail to advise them that pleading guilty to an offense will subject them to deportation. The question presented is whether Padilla applies to… Read More

{ 1 comment }

seventh circuit court of appeals decision; cert granted, 4/30/12 Padilla v. Kentucky: Retroactivity – Habeas Review  The holding of Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473, 1486 (2010), that as in incident of effective representation, “counsel must inform her client whether his plea carries a risk of deportation,” is a “new rule” within the meaning of Teague v… Read More

{ 0 comments }

on petition for review of unpublished decision; for Stevens: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity Issues (provided by court): If a suspect in custody initiates communication with the police after previously invoking his Miranda right to consult with an attorney but has yet to again waive his Miranda rights, do the police violate… Read More

{ 0 comments }