State v. Caltone K. Cockrell, 2007 WI App 217, PFR filed For Cockrell: Paul R. Nesson, Jr. Issue/Holding: Failure to object to the wording of a limiting instruction (limiting jury’s use of certain evidence to impeachment rather than substantive evidence of guilt) waived the right to challenge its efficacy, ¶¶34-36. The court possesses discretionary authority… Read more
B. Published opinions
State v. Owen Budd, 2007 WI App 245 For Budd: Steven P. Weiss, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Review of a published court of appeals’ decision by the supreme court leaves intact any portion of the opinion not reversed, ¶13 n. 4, citing State v. Jones, 2002 WI App 196, ¶40. Jones itself holds: We agree with the State that… Read more
State v. Dwight M. Sanders, 2007 WI App 174, affirmed, 2008 WI 85 For Sanders: Patrick M. Donnelly, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶26 The State argues that our supreme court’s decision in Hughes validates the officers’ hot pursuit entry in this case. In Hughes, the court held that the crime of possession of marijuana was serious enough to justify… Read more
State v. Sherry L. Schultz, 2007 WI App 257; prior history: State v. Scott R. Jensen, 2004 WI App 89, affirmed, 2005 WI 31 For Schultz: Stephen L. Morgan, Jennifer M. Krueger Issue/Holding: Instructional error due to mandatory conclusive presumption wasn’t harmless: ¶28 As we have explained, the trial error consisted of an instruction that… Read more
State v. Twaun L. Gee, 2007 WI App 32 For Gee: Amelia L. Bizzaro Issue/Holding: The holding of State v. Brandon E. Jones, 2005 WI App 259, ¶13, that the reconfinement judge need not review the original sentencing transcript was overruled by State v. John C. Brown, 2006 WI 131, ¶38: ¶14 In Brown, the supreme court addressed the… Read more
State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: The rule of State v. David W. Suchocki, 208 Wis. 2d 509, 561 N.W.2d 332 (Ct. App. 1997) (conflict of interest where PSI author married to defendant’s prosecutor) does not extend to situation where PSI author is married to another… Read more
State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: Thexton wasn’t entitled to Miranda warnings “at the time the PSI was being prepared”: ¶8 Thexton also claims that Streekstra violated his Fifth Amendment rights when he interviewed him during the investigation. Thexton claims that Streekstra used the prior PSI as… Read more
State v. Donald W. Thexton, 2007 WI App 11, PFR filed 1/02/07 For Thexton: Kirk B. Obear Issue/Holding: The agent’s use of a prior PSI during the interview of defendant for the current case did not trigger any additional right to counsel: ¶10 Thexton further argues that his right to counsel was violated because he was unable to consult… Read more
