Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

10. Prior consistent stmnt

State v. Akim A. Brown, 2017AP1332-CR, District 1, 11/6/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) Brown, charged with second degree sexual assault of L.S., testified their sexual encounter was consensual. He argues trial counsel was ineffective for failing to elicit from him certain testimony that would have helped show the encounter was consensual… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Angus Murray McArthur, 2016AP2315-17-CR, 2/20/18, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) This opinion recounts in detail MacArthur’s controlling, violent behavior toward K.W., the victim in this case, and toward 4 of his previous girlfriends. The lead issues are (1) whether McArthur’s conduct toward the previous girlfriends was admissible as… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Victoria Ward, 2015AP2638-CR, 3/21/17, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) To no avail, Ward challenges two evidentiary rulings the circuit court made at her trial on charges of being party to the crimes of maintaining a drug house and possession of heroin with intent to deliver. The first ruling involved… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Wade M. Richey, 2014AP1758-CR, District 3, 3/17/15 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs) In this prosecution for reckless driving causing great bodily harm and homicide by operating with a detectable amount of a controlled substance, the circuit court erroneously excluded Richey’s medical records from evidence at trial, though the error was harmless… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Daniel Buchanan, 2011AP830-CR, District 1, 10/30/12 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity Hearsay – Prior Consistent Statement, § 908.01(4)(a)2 The prior-consistent statement rule allows substantive admissibility of an out-of-court statement if: “(1) the declarant testifies at trial and is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement; (2) the statement is consistent with the declarant’s… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. Kevin S. Meehan, 2001 WI App 119 For Meehan: Pamela Moorshead, Buting & Williams Issue: Whether the alleged victim’s entire testimony at prior proceedings was properly admitted into evidence, under prior consistent statement or rule of completeness rationales. Holding: ¶25. The trial court admitted the entire prior testimony under two theories: (1) the… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Prior Consistent Statement, § 908.01(4)(a)2

State v. Earl L. Miller, 231 Wis.2d 447, 605 N.W.2d 567 (Ct. App. 1999) For Miller: Eduardo M. Borda Issue: Whether a prior consistent statement is admissible where the declarant hasn’t been specifically cross-examined about his/her prior statement. Holding: The requirement in § 908.01(4)(a) that the prior consistent statement declarant be subject to cross-examination concerning… Read More

{ 0 comments }