Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

4. Trial

State v. Jamie Lane Stephenson, 2018AP2104, District 3, 10/29/19 (recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) At a hearing on a committed person’s petition for discharge from a ch. 980 commitment, the state has the burden of proving the person is still a sexually violent person—that is, that the person: (1) has a mental disorder… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Jonathan Phillips, 2010AP1490, District 4, 4/26/12 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Phillips: Steven D. Grunder, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity; originally recommended for publication, changed per order 5/1/12 Although admittedly “inconsistent” in the way it defines “mental disorder,” when read “as a whole,” the pattern jury instruction for ch. 980… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Paschall Lee Sanders, 2011 WI App 125 (recommended for publication); for Sanders: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; case activity The definitions of “mental disorder” in since-amended pattern instruction Wis JI—Criminal 2502 (2009), though concededly contradictory, didn’t prevent from being tried the issue of whether Sanders qualified for commitment as a sexually violent person: ¶14      As we… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Scott Maher, 2010AP460, District 4, 5/26/11 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Maher: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity Testimony from a State’s expert witness describing the ch. 980 screening process was irrelevant. ¶11      We addressed the issue of the admissibility of this same type of evidence in State v… Read More

{ 0 comments }

court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Oliver: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate; BiC; Resp. Br.; Reply Br. SVP – Evidence 1. Unobjected-to testimony by a state evaluator that DHS psychologists are more “conservative” in their conclusions than other SVP experts did not “cloud” the issue and therefore did not support… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Carl Kaminski, 2009 WI App 175

court of appeals decision; for Kaminski:Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate SVP: Misconduct Evidence, § 904.04(2), Reliance on by Expert  SVP expert may rely on the respondent’s unproven prior misconduct in deriving his or her opinion. The § 904.04(2) “preliminary relevance” requirement, State v. James E. Gray, 225 Wis.2d 39, 59-61, 590 N.W.2d 918 (1999); State… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Carl Kaminski, 2009 WI App 175 For Kaminski: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: “Infrequent references to annual re-evaluation” were not “sufficiently egregious to diminish the jury’s sense of responsibility for its verdict,” ¶¶20-24… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Carl Kaminski, 2009 WI App 175 For Kaminski: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Testimony by a state’s expert to the effect that the only treatment program for psychopaths is at Sand Ridge did not require a new trial under the theory that it implicitly suggested commitment would be in the community’s and… Read More

{ 0 comments }