by admin
on January 31, 2021
State v. Shondrell R. Evans, 2020AP286-CR, District 4, 1/28/21 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Evans was seized under the Fourth Amendment when two police officers parked their marked squad cars in a way that restricted—though didn’t totally obstruct—his ability to drive away, shined their headlights and spotlights on his car, and exited their squad cars and approached Evans’s car. Because the police lacked reasonable suspicion to detain Evans, the resulting search of his car was unlawful. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on January 31, 2021
Adams County v. D.R.D., 2020AP1426, 1/28/21, District 4; case activity
This appeal posed a simple question about due process in a Chapter 51 commitment proceeding. Lessard v. Schmidt, 349 F. Supp. 1078 (E.D. Wis. 1972) held that the 14th Amendment requires the county to give a person sufficient notice of the legal standard under which she is being detained so that she has a reasonable opportunity to prepare a defense. D.R.D. raised this issue on appeal but since trial counsel had not preserved the objection, the court of appeals held the issue forfeited. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on January 31, 2021
State v. Samuel Martin Polhamus, 2019AP2339-CR, 1/28/21, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
The State charged Polhamus with bail-jumping and disorderly conduct. A jury acquitted on the first charge and convicted on the second. Polhamus appealed pro se and, according to the court of appeals, appeared to argue that the State’s evidence of his alleged disorderly conduct both inside and outside of a bar was insufficient. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on January 28, 2021
Click here to read an interesting decision from the Tennessee Supreme Court. A lawyer who claimed that he was engaging in dark humor told a Facebook friend how to shoot someone and avoid conviction by making it look like self-defense. He was charged with ethics violations, and his license was suspended for 4 years. The Tennessee Supreme court held that lawyers are bound by ethics rules in any setting–including on social media.
{ }
by admin
on January 28, 2021
State v. V.R., 2020AP798 & 2020799, 1/26/21, Distrct 1 (1-judge opinion; ineligible for publication); case activity
This is an appeal from an order terminating V.R.’s parental rights. The court of appeals rejected a no-merit report because the record revealed that neither defense counsel nor the circuit court had discussed the meaning of a “substantial parental relationship” with V.R. before she pled no contest to failure to assume parental responsibility. On remand, V.R moved to withdraw her no contest plea and filed an affidavit. She lost her motion and now her appeal because she did not appear at the plea withdrawal hearing. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on January 27, 2021
On January 27, 2021, the court of appeals ordered the publication of the following criminal law related decisions: [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on January 26, 2021
State v. Mercado, 2021 WI 2, 1/20/21, reversing a published court of appeals decision; case activity (including briefs)
Mercado stood trial for sexual assault of three young girls. A video of each girl’s forensic interview was played for the jury pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 908.08. Mercado contends that none of the videos were properly admitted. The supreme court holds that he forfeited most of his challenges, and rejects those it considers. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on January 26, 2021
State v. Jalen F. Gillie, 2020AP372, 1/20/21, District 1 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
An officer stopped Gillie’s car on a “dark night” because of “suspected illegal window tint.” An eventual search of the car turned up a gun and Gillie was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon without a permit. On appeal he renews his argument that there was no reasonable suspicion for the stop. The court of appeals agrees with him on this, and so reverses his conviction (and declines to address his other Fourth Amendment claims connected to the encounter). [continue reading…]
{ }
