by admin
on October 11, 2017
State v. Sierra Ann Desing, 2017AP490-491, 10/11/17, District 2, (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A citizen informant told 911 that he saw Desing pulled over on the side of the road hanging out her door. He asked if she was okay and was told “yes,” but he later saw her driving erratically on the highway. Deputies went to her house, knocked “loudly,” received no response, discovered her back door and patio door open on May 28 at 7:30 a.m., saw her dog running loose in the backyard, and, fearing that she might be choking on her own vomit, entered the house and searched until they found her asleep in the basement. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on October 11, 2017
State v. Sarah A. Schmidt, 2017AP724-CR, District 2, 10/11/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
For operating while intoxicated, no less—even though there was scant evidence of impaired driving and the driver exhibited no slurred speech and apparently normal balance and motor coordination. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on October 11, 2017
Racine County Human Services Dep’t v. C.C., 2017AP750, District 2, 10/11/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The evidence presented at the fact-finding hearing in C.C.’s TPR proceeding was sufficient to establish that she failed to assume parental responsibility under § 48.415(6). [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on October 11, 2017
City of New Richmond v. Warren Wayne Slocum, 2016AP1887, District 3, 10/11/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Slocum unsuccessfully challenges the sufficiency of the evidence used to find he violated a New Richmond municipal ordinance, § 50.88(a)(1), which tracks § 947.01(1). [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on October 10, 2017
State v. Damien Markeith Divone Scott, 2017 WI App 74; case activity (including briefs)
In this case of first impression in Wisconsin, the court of appeals holds that the stop of a car at a police checkpoint was justified by the “special needs” of law enforcement. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on October 10, 2017
State v. C.L.K., 2017AP1413 & 2017AP1414, District 1, 10/10/17 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication), petition for review granted 3/14/18, reversed, 2019 WI 14; case activity
The circuit court directed a verdict in favor of the state during the grounds phase of the TPR proceedings against C.L.K. without allowing him the opportunity to present evidence. The court of appeals agrees this was error, but holds the error was harmless. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on October 10, 2017
{ }
by admin
on October 8, 2017
M.R.B. v. S.S., 2017AP1217-1219, 10/5/17, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
This slim opinion delivers hard blows to a father resisting the termination of his parental rights. They concern circuit court competency, a request for a continuance, and the sufficiency of evidence in determining whether termination was in the best interests of his children. The court of appeals’ reasoning on the last point supplies fodder for a petition for review. [continue reading…]
{ }
