Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

3. Elements

State v. Rory A. McKellips, 2015 WI App 31, petition for review granted 11/16/15, reversed, 2016 WI 51; case activity (including briefs) McKellips is entitled to a new trial on charges he used a computer to facilitate a child sex crime because the jury was erroneously instructed to decide whether McKellips’s cell phone constituted a “computerized… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Addison F. Steiner, 2013AP2629-CR, district 4, 10/16/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity This case raises an issue that even the court of appeals deemed to be of first impression. Does §948.20, which criminalizes abandonment of a child, require an intent to abandon a child permanently, or is leaving a child alone for 1 or 2 hours… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Patrick R. Patterson, 2009 WI App 161 For Patterson: David R. Karpe Issue/Holding: ¶29      We will assume, for purposes of Patterson’s argument, that the definition of “juvenile” in Wis. Stat. § 938.02 applies for purposes of defining “delinquency” in Wis. Stat. § 948.40. Nonetheless, Patterson’s statutory analysis ignores the fact that a seventeen-year-old is only… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Eric T. Olson, 2008 WI App 171 For Olson: Byron C. Lichstein Issue/Holding: The “act other than element” of § 948.075(3) isn’t satisfied by either transmission of live video of the shirtless defendant, or by his prior sexual encounters with others he met on-line: ¶11      Accordingly, we read the statute to require that… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Lawrence Payette, 2008 WI App 106, PFR filed 6/30/08 For Payette: Robert R. Henak; Amelia L. Bizzaro Issue: Whether repeated “dope dating” (giving a minor cocaine on multiple occasions in exchange for sex) amounts to causing the child to practice prostitution within the meaning of § 948.08. Holding1: “Practice” prostitution: ¶15      Payette is… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Eric T. Olson, 2008 WI App 171 For Olson: Byron C. Lichstein Issue/Holding: The “act other than element” of § 948.075(3) isn’t satisfied by either transmission of live video of the shirtless defendant, or by his prior sexual encounters with others he met on-line: ¶11      Accordingly, we read the statute to require that… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Quentrell E. Williams, 2006 WI App 212 For Williams: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Because “recklessly” causing harm to a child, § 948.03(b), is determined solely from an objective point of view, evidence related to whether the actor “subjectively thought his [disciplinary action] was reasonable parental discipline” is irrelevant, including evidence… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Dennis Charles Schulpius, 2006 WI App 263 For Schulpius: Bridget Boyle Issue/Holding: ¶10      … The subsection has two elements:  (1) the defendant must have done something that shows that he or she had, as phrased by § 948.075(1), the “intent to have sexual contact or sexual intercourse” with someone whom he or she… Read More

{ 0 comments }