On review of a per curiam unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity
Issue (composed by On Point)
Did the circuit court violate Jesse Herrmann’s due process right to an impartial judge by exhibiting objective bias in sentencing Herrmann?
City of Tomah v. Steven Seward, 2014AP735, District 4, 9/25/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Applying State v. Post, 2007 WI 60, 301 Wis. 2d 1, 733 N.W.2d 634, the court of appeals holds there was reasonable suspicion to stop Seward based on a police officer’s observations of his weaving within his lane of travel for about one mile at 11:34 p.m.
State v. Adrian A. Starks, 2013AP93, District 4, 9/25/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
New information that one of the officers who testified at Starks’s trial violated department policy on dozens of occasions (three of which occurred in Starks’s case) and ultimately resigned after an internal investigation didn’t entitle Starks to a new trial because there isn’t a reasonable probability that a jury considering the new evidence together with the old evidence would reach a different verdict.
State v. Jacob G. Mayer, 2013AP2758-CR, District 2, 9/24/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
The trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury on the defense of voluntary intoxication and the prosecutor’s improper closing argument were harmless, but the latter is egregious enough to cause the court of appeals to refer the prosecutor to OLR.
State v. Julie A. Bilquist, 2014AP426-CR, District 3, 9/23/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
The totality of the circumstances justified extending Bilquist’s detention to investigate whether she was driving while intoxicated despite the lack of indicia—e.g., odor of an intoxicant; glossy, bloodshot eyes; slurred speech—suggesting she had consumed an intoxicant.
On review of a published court of appeals decision in Kempainen (case activity) and a per curiam decision in Hurley (case activity)
Issues (adapted from the State’s PFR in Hurley):
Did the amended complaint charging repeated sexual assault of a child, which alleged that Hurley assaulted his stepdaughter at least 26 times over a five or six-year charging period, satisfy Hurley’s due process right to prepare a defense?
Did the circuit court properly exercise its discretion in admitting “other acts” evidence that Hurley repeatedly assaulted his sister when she was 10 and he was 14 in view of the greater latitude shown “other crimes” evidence in child sexual assault cases?
Did the circuit court err in ordering a new trial due to the prosecutor’s unobjected-to remark in closing argument about Hurley’s failure in his trial testimony to make a strong denial of his sister’s allegations?
On review of a published court of appeals decision; case activity
Issue (adapted from Daniel’s PFR):
1. Under Wisconsin law, should the defendant bear the burden of proving incompetency? If so, is it by clear and convincing evidence or by a preponderance of the evidence?
2. When postconviction counsel questions the defendant’s competency, but the defendant insists that he is competent, what procedures should the circuit court employ?
3. What standard of review should an appellate court apply to a circuit court’s determination of a defendant’s competency to participate in postconviction proceedings?
On review of an unpublished, one-judge court of appeals decision; case activity
Issues (composed by On Point):
Whether the trial court was clearly wrong in finding that Cecil had not failed to assume parental responsibility for his infant son?
Whether a parent’s expression of interest in his child equates to having a “substantial relationship” with the child?
