State v. Loomis has made the NYTimes again. See today’s article by Adam Liptak: Sent to Prison by Software’s Secret Algorithms.
State v. Sambath Pal, 2017 WI 44, 4/28/17, affirming a court of appeals summary disposition, 2015AP1782-CR; case activity (including briefs)
Driver crashes into group of motorcyclists, kills one, mortally injures a second, flees the scene, and eventually pleads guilty to 2 counts of hit and run resulting in death contrary to §346.67(1). He’s sentenced to 2 consecutive terms of 10 years IC and 10 years ES. Questions Presented: Did driver commit 1 offense or 2? And is his sentence unduly harsh? [continue reading…]
State v. George D. Taylor, 2015AP1325-CR, 4/27/17, District 1/4 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Taylor raises a host of challenges to his felony murder conviction. The court of appeals rejects all of them except one: an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, which the court orders must be assessed at a Machner hearing. [continue reading…]
Maya Elaine Smith v. Jeff Anderson, 2017 WI 43, dismissing a petition for review of 366 Wis. 2d 808, 874 N.W.2d 347 (Ct. App. 2016)(unpublished); case activity (including briefs)
Recently, SCOW has marched ahead and decided issues that the parties did not properly preserve or brief–to the detriment of indigent defendants. Recall what happened a few weeks ago in State v. Denny and earlier in State v. Sulla and State v. Smith. But in this case, after briefing and argument by the parties and an amicus curiae, a 3-justice majority (Ziegler and RG Bradley didn’t participate) showed remarkable restraint. It issued a per curiam opinion dismissing a petition for review as improvidently granted because nobody preserved an issue the court of appeals declined to decide. The upshot? It appears that SCOW has rescued West Bend Mutual Insurance Company from an appellate blunder and possible defeat. The blunder presents a teachable moment for appellate lawyers trying to preserve issues for supreme court review. [continue reading…]
A Tennessee lawyer is under fire for arguing that women are especially good at lying during the trial of a wealthy businessman accused of rape. The jury acquitted the defendant. Interestingly, 9 of the 12 jurors were women. Read more here.
State v. Julieann Baehni, 2015AP2263-CR, 4/27/17, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Baehni was charged with OWI, fourth offense. In the circuit she unsuccessfully sought to have the blood draw test results suppressed because she wasn’t given the alternative test she requested. She also collaterally attacked two of her prior convictions, likewise without success. The court of appeals affirms. [continue reading…]
State v. Noah M. Sanders, 2016AP2387-CR, 4/27/17, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The complaint’s summary of the allegations in support of the charges provided a sufficient factual basis for Sanders’s pleas to intimidation of a victim. [continue reading…]
State v. Kyle Lee Monahan, 2014AP2187, 4/27/17, District 4 (not recommended for publication) review granted 11/13/17; Affirmed 6/29/18; case activity (including briefs)
Kyle Monahan was convicted of OWI homicide after a jury trial. The trial court excluded evidence offered to show that Monahan was not, in fact, driving the vehicle when it crashed. On appeal, the state agrees with Monahan that the evidence should have come in, but argues that its exclusion was harmless. The court of appeals agrees with the state.
