While we don’t usually cover SCOTUS’s order list unless there’s something special going on, the most recent order clocked in at nearly 60 pages and featured a number of interesting dissents that we thought our readers would be intrigued by. [continue reading…]
There has been a real paucity of relevant cases from the Seventh. We keep saving this article and hoping more could be added, but until things heat up again, we thought we’d share these cases from the last few months that might be relevant to our readers.
With a new administration comes changes to our immigration laws. Fortunately, the SPD’s Immigration Practice Coordinators are here to provide you with an updated analysis of the many legal developments relevant to our clients.
State v. K.R.W., 2024AP1210, 2/19/25, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Although COA does not address K.R.W.’s broader constitutional argument, it holds that suppression is warranted given the State’s violation of a statute requiring an intake worker to warn a juvenile of his right to counsel and right against self-incrimination before taking that juvenile’s statement.
[continue reading…]
State v. N.K.B., 2023AP722-CR, petition for review of a published decision of the court of appeals, granted 2/12/25; case activity
In yet another involuntary med appeal arising from pretrial competency proceedings, SCOW is asked to clarify whether dangerousness alone is a sufficient basis on which to order involuntary medication.
State v. J.D.B., 2023AP715-CR, petition for review of a published decision of the court of appeals, granted 2/12/25; case activity
In a case that promises to have broad repercussions for how involuntary medication hearings are conducted under § 971.14(5)(am). , SCOW agrees to review a case we termed a “HUGE” defense win.
State v. Adams, 2023AP218-CR, petition for review of a published decision of the court of appeals, granted 2/12/25; case activity
SCOW grants Adams’s petition for review in part and signifies its interest in bringing clarity to an important procedural aspect of reverse waiver hearings.
Dane County v. A.M.M., 2024AP1670, 2/13/25, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
“Amanda” challenges the sufficiency of the evidence pertaining to her medication order. The COA calls this a “close case,” but affirms.
[continue reading…]
