≡ Menu

4. Evidence

State v. James W. Whistleman, 2001 WI App 189 For Whistleman: Michael J. Devanie Issue: Whether storage of images on a computer disk satisfies the “pictorial reproduction” element of § 948.12. Holding: ¶7 … The computer disks taken from Whistleman’s residence produce visual images on the computer screen when a person inserts the disks into… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. David J. Lenz, 230 Wis.2d 529, 602 N.W.2d 173 (Ct. App. 1999) For Lenz: Steven D. Phillips, SPD, Madison Appellate. Issue: Whether intercepts of tax refunds can be considered payments toward support obligations. Holding: The nonsupport statute doesn’t require that payments be made “voluntarily,” and tax refund intercepts therefore count. “The intercepts are… Read more

{ 0 comments }

§ 948.22, Nonsupport — inability to pay

State v. Christopher M. Clutter, 230 Wis.2d 472, 602 N.W.2d 324 (Ct. App. 1999) For Clutter: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate. Issue: Whether the nonsupport defense of inability to pay is viable by showing “lack of financial resources alone.” Holding: “(L)ack of financial resources alone is insufficient to demonstrate inability to pay.” Inability to… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Mark Inglin, 224 Wis.2d 764, 592 N.W.2d 666 (Ct. App. 1999) For Inglin: Stephen M. Glynn & Robert R. Henak Holding: § 948.31(1)(b) penalizes several different actus reus alternatives, including taking a child away, or withholding a child more than 12 hours beyond court approval. Inglin had his ex-wife’s consent to take their child… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Gary R. Brunette, 220 Wis. 431, 583 N.W.2d 174 (Ct. App. 1998) For Brunette: Kevin Schram Issue/Holding: Seven-year old’s testimony that she was touched on or near her “privates” and “potty place” sufficient to sustain conviction for first-degree sexual assault… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Teresa L. Bellows, 218 Wis. 2d 614, 582 N.W.2d 53 (Ct. App. 1998) For Bellows: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: …The State was required to prove that: (1) Bellows was responsible for the welfare of her three children; (2) she intentionally contributed to their neglect; and (3) the children were under… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS