Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

2. Admit/exclude evidence

R.J.M. v. M.R.H., 2016AP1307, 9/22/2016, District 4 (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity M.R.H. appeals the termination of his parental rights to his son, arguing that the jury during the grounds phase should not have heard (1) that he had previously been willing to voluntarily terminate his rights or (2) that his son wanted… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. D.L., 2016AP735 & 2016AP736, District 1, 8/18/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity The trial court didn’t err in admitting multiple hearsay statements made by D.L.’s children about her treatment of them or in admitting expert testimony about whether D.L. had a “strong bond” or “positive and healthy relationships” with her children… Read More

{ 0 comments }

State v. G.H., 2015AP1606, District 1, 4/28/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity G.H.’s parental rights to M.R.H. were terminated on the grounds that M.R.H. remained in need of protection or services under § 48.415(2) and that G.H. had failed to assume parental responsibility under § 48.415(6). The court of appeals rejects his claims… Read More

{ 0 comments }

TPR orders withstand multiple challenges

State v. C.R.R./State v. M.R., 2015AP1771 & 2015AP1772, District 3, 4/13/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity The court of appeals rejects various challenges to orders terminating the parental rights C.R.R. and M.R., the mother and father, respectively, of A.M.R. Sufficiency of the evidence that the parents received written TPR warnings: The initial CHIPS dispositional… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Racine County Human Services Dep’t v. L.H., 2015AP1872, 3/23/16, District 2 (1-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity During the fact-finding stage of L.H.’s TPR trial, counsel (1) failed to object to evidence that L.H’.s child, C.M., had bonded with his foster parents; (2) failed to object to an inaccurate 5/6ths verdict instruction; and (3) and… Read More

{ 0 comments }

TPR affirmed against welter of challenges

Pierce County v. C.S., 2015AP1463 & 2015AP1464, District 3, 2/26/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity C.S. challenges the orders terminating her parental rights to her sons, D. S. and K. S., based on their continuing need for protection or services. She raises multiple, fact-specific claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and circuit court… Read More

{ 0 comments }

Counsel at TPR trial wasn’t ineffective

Barron County DHHS v. J.H., 2015AP1529, District 3, 1/13/16 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity J.H.’s claims that her trial counsel was ineffective are rejected because trial counsel’s actions were either not deficient or not prejudicial. The County petitioned to terminate the parental rights of J.H., who is developmentally disabled, on continuing CHIPS grounds… Read More

{ 0 comments }

La Crosse County HSD v. C.J.T., 2015AP252, District 4, 10/16/15 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity The fact that the County’s attorney handling this TPR proceeding retained the GAL in the case to represent the her in an unrelated personal injury matter didn’t create a conflict of interest that required a new trial. The GAL had… Read More

{ 0 comments }