Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

C. Forfeiture Doctrine

State v. Joseph B. Reinwand, 2019 WI 25, 3/19/19, on certification from the court of appeals; case activity (including briefs) The Confrontation Clause ordinarily bars the admission of testimonial statements of a witness if the witness does not appear at trial to testify and be cross-examined. But under the “forfeiture by wrongdoing” doctrine, a witness’s… Read More

{ 1 comment }

State v. Joseph B. Reinwand, 2017AP850-CR; certification granted 9/4/2018; case activity (including briefs) Issues (from the court of appeals’ certification): 1.  Whether the doctrine that provides for the forfeiture of the right to confrontation by wrongdoing applies at a homicide trial where the declarant is the homicide victim, but where the defendant killed the declarant to prevent… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Joseph B. Reinwand, 2017AP850-CR, District 4, 7/26/18, certification granted 9/4/2018, affirmed 2019 WI 25; case activity (including briefs) Issues: We certify this appeal to the Wisconsin Supreme Court to decide a question involving the “forfeiture by wrongdoing” doctrine. Under this doctrine, testimonial statements, which would otherwise be barred under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment if… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Mark D. Jensen v. Marc Clements, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 14-1380, 9/8/15, affirming Jensen v. Schwochert, No. 11-C-0803 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 18, 2013) At Jensen’s trial for the murder of his wife Julie the State introduced Julie’s handwritten letter to the police, written two weeks before her death, in which she wrote she would never… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Royce L. Hawthorne, 2014AP1566/67, 5/12/15, District 1 (not recommended for publication); click here for briefs Hawthorne filed a pro se appeal from the denial of his §974.06 postconviction motion, which raised 9 claims of ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel and 3 claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The court of appeals dispensed… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Mark D. Jensen v. James Schwochert, No. 11-C-0803 (E.D. Wis. Dec. 18, 2013) Judge William Griesbach of the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin, has ordered a new trial for Mark Jensen, who was convicted of killing his wife Julie based in part on the use of oral and written statements she made before… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Mark D. Jensen, 2011 WI App 3; prior history: 2007 WI 26; for Jensen: Terry W. Rose, Christopher William Rose, Michael D. Cicchini; case activity; (Jensen BiC not posted); State Resp.; Jensen Reply Confrontation – Generally The Confrontation Clause regulates testimonial statements only, such that nontestimonial statements are excludable only under hearsay and other evidence-rule ¶¶22-26, citing Giles v… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Scottie L. Baldwin, 2010 WI App 162 (recommended for publication); for Baldwin: Robert E. Haney; (principal briefs not posted on-line) The trial judge’s findings, though made prior to Giles v. California, 128 S.Ct. 2678 (2008), satisfied the test imposed by that case, that forfeiture of the right to confrontation requires intent to prevent the… Read More

{ 0 comments }