≡ Menu

3. Evidence

State v. Henry E. Routon, 2007 WI App 178, PFR filed  For Routon: Jefren E. Olsen, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding:  Evidence of conspiracy to manufacture controlled substance is sufficient, notwithstanding that the psilocybe spores that defendant sold were themselves legal, given “abundant evidence from which it is reasonable to infer that Routon marketed the psilocybe spores… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Charles E. Dukes, 2007 WI App 175 For Dukes: Robert N. Meyeroff Issue/Holding: ¶22      Dukes contends that this evidence is insufficient because there was “no physical evidence linking [him] to the drug house and the drugs in the drug house,” because neither his fingerprints nor DNA were on any of the items recovered… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Sheldon C. Stank, 2005 WI App 236 For Stank: Dennis P. Coffey Issue/Holding: ¶45      We further reject Stank’s argument that insufficient evidence existed to support the “intent to deliver” element of count two. According to Peasley v. State, 83 Wis. 2d 224, 229, 231-32, 265 N.W.2d 506 (1978), the finder of fact may consider… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Rickey Eugene Pinkard, 2005 WI App 226 For Pinkard: John J. Grau Issue/Holding: Someone holding drugs for another person and planning to return the drugs to that person intends to deliver within the meaning of § 961.41(1m). State v. Smith, 189 Wis. 2d 496, 525 N.W.2d 264 (1995) (conspiracy to deliver not supported where only… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Sheldon C. Stank, 2005 WI App 236 For Stank: Dennis P. Coffey Issue/Holding: Proof of the controlled substance is sufficient where a “presumptive” test is followed by a “confirmatory” one (State v. Dye, 215 Wis. 2d 281, 572 N.W.2d 524 (Ct. App. 1997), followed), with the PDR being used to establish the presumption: ¶42      Here, the… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. John L. Griffin, 220 Wis. 2d 371, 584 N.W.2d 127 (Ct. App. 1998) For Griffin: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Like other jurisdictions, to be found guilty of possession of a controlled substance in Wisconsin, the defendant must have had the substance under his or her control and must have knowingly… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. John L. Griffin, 220 Wis. 2d 371, 584 N.W.2d 127 (Ct. App. 1998) For Griffin: Donald T. Lang, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Griffin was charged with drug possession. In State v. Pozo, 198 Wis.2d 705, 714, 544 N.W.2d 228, 232 (Ct. App. 1995), we stated that although a large amount of cash on… Read more

{ 0 comments }

State v. Linda M. Henthorn, 218 Wis. 2d 526, 581 N.W.2d 544 Ct. App. 1998) For Henthorn: Michael Yovovich, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: Viewing the facts most favorable to the prosecution requires us to assume that, despite her denial, Henthorn in fact altered the prescription, changing the refill number from “1” to “11.” She then… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS