≡ Menu

Garland v. Cargill, USSC No. 22-976, June 14, 2024, affirming Cargill v. Garland , 57 F.4th 447 (5th Cir. 2023) (en banc); Scotusblog page (with links to briefs and commentary)

ATF exceeded authority when it defined “machinegun” to include bump stocks.

[continue reading…]

{ 0 comments }

St. Croix County v. B.T.C., 2023AP2085, 6/11/24, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

In the second decision this week reversing a circuit court’s commitment order under Chapter 51, the COA concludes that respondent telling a police officer that he would “bring the chief to justice” not sufficient to establish the respondent is “dangerous.”
[continue reading…]

{ 0 comments }

State v. Reynaldo Rosalez, 2022AP1929-CR, 6/11/24, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity

In a case illustrating the stringent standard of review used to assess findings of fact, COA dispatches with Rosalez’s claim that his lawyer failed to discuss a defense related to his alleged medication-induced amnesia.
[continue reading…]

{ 0 comments }

Marathon County v. N.R.P., 2023AP638, 6/11/24, District III (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

In yet another Chapter 51 reversal, COA finds fault with both the circuit court’s decision to admit and rely on hearsay evidence and its failure to make the required findings.
[continue reading…]

{ 0 comments }

Seventh Circuit cases for May

May was quiet; aside from the seismic win in Pope, there were only a few cases of potential interest to our readers:
[continue reading…]

{ 0 comments }

Van Oudenhoven v. Wis. Dept. of Justice, 2023AP70-FT, 6/4/24, District III (recommended for publication); case activity

Court of Appeals affirms circuit court’s order affirming DOJ’s decision to deny applicant’s request to purchase firearm after applicant’s conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence was expunged.
[continue reading…]

{ 2 comments }

State v. Joseph S. Schenian, 2023AP2017-CR, 6/5/24, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

Despite Schenian’s best efforts to do away with a damaging PBT result, COA rejects his arguments and affirms.
[continue reading…]

{ 0 comments }

Outagamie County DHHS v. L.C.E., 2023AP929, District 3, 6/4/24 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

There was insufficient evidence for the protective placement order because the County failed to prove that “Lauren” was “so totally incapable of providing for . . . her own care or custody as to create a substantial risk of serious harm to . . . herself or others,” as required by § 55.08(1)(c). [continue reading…]

{ 0 comments }
RSS