Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

State v. Aaron Antonio Allen, 2010 WI 10

supreme court “decision” (court splits 3-3); for Allen: Robert R. Henak

Recusal – Individual Supreme Court Justice – Reviewability
The question of whether a claim of bias against one Justice (Gableman) is reviewable by the full court fails to yield a majority. The court splits 3-3 (Justice Gableman not participating), in a total of 5 separate opinions (3 would assume jurisdiction to review claim and would order full briefing on merits of claim; 3 reject idea that claim is reviewable and would leave resolution to individual Justice at issue, though they nonetheless somewhat inconsistently proceed to review the merits). Because there is no majority, the net effect is to reject jurisdiction to review, non-precedentially. If you want a quick overview, look at ¶¶1-9. No attempt is made here to summarize the various positions, for that, go here.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail