Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

2. Reverse representation

State v. Christopher M. Medina, 2006 WI App 76 For Medina: Daniel P. Ryan Issue/Holding: A claim that the prosecutor represented the defendant in a prior case may be raised in a pretrial motion to disqualify the prosecutor, which requires a showing that “the subject matter of the two representations are ‘substantially related,’” ¶15, quoting State v. Tkacz, 2002… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Christopher M. Medina, 2006 WI App 76 For Medina: Daniel P. Ryan Issue: Whether a motion to disqualify a prosecutor because of representation of defendant in a prior case, brought immediately before jury selection, may be deemed waived on timeliness grounds. Holding: ¶24        We conclude the circuit court may, in the proper exercise of… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Christopher M. Medina, 2006 WI App 76 For Medina: Daniel P. Ryan Issue/Holding: ¶33      The circuit court here accepted the district attorney’s testimony that he did not remember any conversation with Medina during the prior representation. It also found that the district attorney did not refer to any information at sentencing from the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Peter G. Tkacz, 2002 WI App 281, PFR filed 11/14/02 For Tkacz: Mark S. Rosen Issue: Whether the prosecutor’s prior representation of the defendant in a civil forfeiture worked a disqualifying conflict of interest. Holding: The standard for analyzing the existence of a conflict of interest (raised before trial) in serial representation is the “substantial… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. David Kalk, 2000 WI App 62, 234 Wis. 2d 98, 608 N.W.2d 428 For Kalk: John A. Pray, UW Law School Issue: Whether the defendant satisfied his burden of showing an actual conflict of interest stemming from his prior representation by the prosecutor on an unrelated charge. Holding: Given the trial court’s findings… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Michael Love, 227 Wis.2d 60, 594 N.W.2d 806 (1999), reversing State v. Love 218 Wis.2d 1, 579 N.W.2d 277 (Ct. App. 1999) For Love: Philip J. Brehm. Holding: Love was represented at sentencing after revocation by an attorney who had been the prosecutor at the original sentencing, 20 months earlier; the attorney couldn’t remember appearing for… Read More

{ 0 comments }