State v. Marie A. Ezell, 2014 WI App 101; case actvity Prison guards overheard Ezell tell her incarcerated boyfriend that she would smuggle in drugs for him on her next visit. When she tried to follow through, the guards detained her in a conference room, questioned her, and obtained damning evidence. Due to the lack… Read more
a. Police
State v. Todd W. Berggren, 2009 WI App 82, PFR filed 6/24/09 For Berggren: Robert G. LeBell Issue/Holding: ¶29 Berggren also argues that his statements were induced by promises of probation and treatment. This amounts to an argument that his statements were not voluntarily given. He contends that the detective questioning him conveyed: “the belief that… Read more
State v. Heather A. Markwardt, 2007 WI App 242, PFR filed 11/29/07 For Markwardt: Richard Hahn Issue/Holding: Markwardt’s in-custody statement was voluntary: any stress she was under was “unrelated to police conduct” (¶37); she didn’t unequivocally assert her rights (¶40); that the interrogator “was at times confrontational and raised his voice is not improper police procedure and does… Read more
State v. Matthew J. Knapp, 2003 WI 121, on certification For Knapp: Robert G. LeBell Issue: In essence, this court is presented with the question of whether a custodial inculpatory statement, obtained without proper Miranda warnings, and extracted through the use of police deception, is an “involuntary” self-incriminatory statement and inadmissible at trial for any purpose,” ¶95. (The police ruse involved… Read more
State v. Paul D. Hoppe, 2003 WI 43, affirming unpublished opinion For Hoppe: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶46. Both Connelly and Clappes support the proposition that some coercive or improper police conduct must exist in order to sustain a finding of involuntariness. However, both of these cases also recognize that police conduct does not need to be… Read more
State v. Paul D. Hoppe, 2003 WI 43, affirming unpublished opinion For Hoppe: William E. Schmaal, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Under “somewhat unique” facts, a suspect’s statements made during interviews in a hospital over a three-day period while delusional and in the throes of acute alcohol withdrawal were involuntary despite the absence of any egregious police pressure… Read more
State v. Marvin J. Moss, 2003 WI App 239, PFR filed 10/27/03 For Moss: F.M. Van Hecke Issue/Holding: ¶2. The issue in this case is whether a defendant’s incriminating statement improperly coerced by a person who is not a state agent offends constitutional due process such that the statement is inadmissible. We conclude that there is… Read more
State v. Stanley A. Samuel, 2002 WI 34, reversing 2001 WI App 25, 240 Wis. 2d 756, 623 N.W.2d 565 For Samuel: Robert A. Henak Issue/Holding: “¶30. With due process as our touchstone, we conclude that when a defendant seeks to suppress witness statements as the product of coercion, the police misconduct must be more… Read more
