Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

i. Voluntariness of waiver

State v. Manuel Garcia, 2018AP2319-CR, petition for review granted 1/20/21; case activity Issue for review: (adapted from the State’s PFR  and the COA’s opinion): Whether the State may invoke the impeachment exception to the exclusionary rule during its case-in-chief and thereby use a defendant’s statement, taken in violation of Miranda, to rehabilitate one of its… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Manuel Garcia, 2020 WI App 71, petition to review granted, 1/20/21; case activity (including briefs) Even if a court suppresses a defendant’s voluntary statement because it was obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), the state may use the statement to impeach the defendant if he or she elects… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Isaiah N. Triggs, 2014AP204-CR, District 1, 10/28/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity Trial counsel wasn’t ineffective for waiving a preliminary hearing in Triggs’s homicide prosecution or for failing to move to suppress Triggs’s confession. Further, the circuit court’s plea colloquy with Triggs was not defective and the circuit court didn’t erroneously exercise… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Ladarius Marshall, 2012AP140-CR, District 1, 7/2/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity The trial court properly denied Marshall’s motion to suppress his statements to police made during on-again off-again interrogation lasting from 10:45 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The court first rejects Marshall’s argument he didn’t invoke his right to… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Jennifer L. Ward, 2009 WI 60, affirming unpublished opinion For Ward: T. Christopher Kelly Issue/Holding: Taken individually and collectively, Ward’s 3 statements were voluntary, weighing personal characteristics against police conduct. Personal characteristics, ¶23. Ward was: “relatively sophisticated and intelligent”; 35 years old; a high school graduate; prior conviction; the daughter of a police chief. Her “unprompted… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Miranda Waiver – Voluntariness

State v. Scott M. Hambly, 2008 WI 10, affirming 2006 WI App 256 For Hambly: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶93      The defendant summarizes his argument that he did not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his right to counsel, stating that at the time of his arrest, he was hungry, alone in the back seat… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Xavier J. Rockette, 2005 WI App 205 For Rockette: Timothy A. Provis Issue/Holding: ¶24     We conclude that Rockette did not waive his Miranda rights. Rockette does not argue that Chausee did anything to coerce his confession. Indeed, the purpose of Rockette’s cooperation at the interview, which his own counsel set up, was to increase… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Statements – Voluntariness – Juveniles

A.M. v. Butler, 360 F.3d 787 (7th Cir. 2004) Issue/Holding: … In fact, the Supreme Court has consistently recognized that a confession or waiver of rights by a juvenile is not the same as a confession or waiver by an adult. A defendant’s age is an important factor in determining whether a confession is voluntary. ……… Read more

{ 0 comments }