Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

5. Coercion or misconduct

State v. Jeanette M. Janusiak, 2015AP160-CR, 1/28/16, District 4 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Pregnancy does not by itself make a suspect particularly vulnerable to police pressure and tactics during custodial interrogation, the court of appeals holds, so the fact that Janusiak was in an advanced state of pregnancy didn’t render her… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Review of a published court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs) Issues (composed by On Point from the PFR) Does the inevitable discovery doctrine require the State to show that information gained through police misconduct did not prompt or influence the purportedly lawful investigation? Does the inevitable discovery doctrine require the State to show that it… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Marie A. Ezell, 2014 WI App 101; case actvity Prison guards overheard Ezell tell her incarcerated boyfriend that she would smuggle in drugs for him on her next visit. When she tried to follow through, the guards detained her in a conference room, questioned her, and obtained damning evidence.  Due to the lack… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Stanley K. Bullock, 2014 WI App 29, case activity How “voluntary” does this sound to you? The defendant was convicted of 1st-degree reckless homicide for the stabbing death of his girlfriend.  He said that masked attackers broke into their apartment and stabbed him and his girlfriend.  He called 911.  The responding paramedics found… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Todd W. Berggren, 2009 WI App 82, PFR filed 6/24/09 For Berggren: Robert G. LeBell Issue/Holding: ¶29      Berggren also argues that his statements were induced by promises of probation and treatment. This amounts to an argument that his statements were not voluntarily given. He contends that the detective questioning him conveyed: “the belief that… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Heather A. Markwardt, 2007 WI App 242, PFR filed 11/29/07 For Markwardt: Richard Hahn Issue/Holding: Markwardt’s in-custody statement was voluntary: any stress she was under was “unrelated to police conduct” (¶37); she didn’t unequivocally assert her rights (¶40); that the interrogator “was at times confrontational and raised his voice is not improper police procedure and does… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Matthew J. Knapp, 2003 WI 121, on certification For Knapp: Robert G. LeBell Issue: In essence, this court is presented with the question of whether a custodial inculpatory statement, obtained without proper Miranda warnings, and extracted through the use of police deception, is an “involuntary” self-incriminatory statement and inadmissible at trial for any purpose,” ¶95. (The police ruse involved… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Paul D. Hoppe, 2003 WI 43, affirming unpublished opinion For Hoppe: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶46. Both Connelly and Clappes support the proposition that some coercive or improper police conduct must exist in order to sustain a finding of involuntariness. However, both of these cases also recognize that police conduct does not need to be… Read More

{ 0 comments }