Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

I. Authentication, Ch. 909

State v. Robert Vincent McCoy, 2012AP2583-CR, District 1, 1/7/14; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity An armed robbery outside a bar was caught on the security camera of a nearby homeowner, who gave a copy of the video to the police by uploading it on YouTube and emailing it to the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Gregg B. Kandutsch, 2011 WI 78, affirming unpublished decision; for Kandutsch: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity Computer-Generated Report (Electronic Monitoring Device) – Foundation Expert testimony isn’t necessary to lay a foundation for admissibility for a computer-generated EMD report: ¶28  Closing down a trial is not to be taken lightly, which is why the requirement… Read More

{ 0 comments }

decision below: unpublished; for Kandutsch: Eileen A. Hirsch, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity Issues (formulated by On Point): Whether admission into evidence of electronic monitoring daily summary reports requires expert testimony to lay a foundation as to accuracy and reliability. Whether the daily summary reports fall outside the definition of hearsay because they don’t represent assertions… 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 }

Evidence – Recording – Best Evidence Rule

State v. John D. Harris, 2009AP3140-CR, District 1, 8/17/10 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Harris: Byron C. Lichstein; BiC; Resp.; Reply Testimony of an investigator relating the contents of a recording wasn’t inadmissible under the best evidence rule, § 910.02. ¶11 Although the best evidence rule generally requires an original recording… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Jeremy Denton, 2009 WI App 78 / State v. Aubrey W. Dahl, 2009 WI App 78 For Denton: Paul G. Bonneson For Dahl: Patrick M. Donnelly Issue/Holding: Foundational requirement of probative value applies to computer-generated animation used as demonstrative exhibit to recreate crime scene: ¶17      Turning to probative value, we examine the State’s… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Walter William McCoy, 2007 WI App 15 For McCoy: Andrea Taylor Cornwall Issue/Holding: ¶18   … We start by acknowledging that the chain of evidence in this case is not perfect. There are substantial time gaps as pointed out by McCoy. Nonetheless, the chain of custody evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Authentication, § 909.01

State v. Thomas Scott Bailey Smith, Sr., 2005 WI 104, reversing 2004 WI App 116 For Smith: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Testimony of a court employee that she had examined a certified copy of a foreign court order and that the exhibit to be admitted into evidence was a copy of that order sufficiently authenticated… Read More

{ 0 comments }