by admin
on September 20, 2022
State v. Singh, 2021AP1111-CR, 8/18/22, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Singh challenges his 2005 conviction for OWI, first offense. He first asks for a writ of coram nobis vacating the conviction. Alternatively, he asks that his conviction be vacated or amended under State v. Forrett, 2022 WI 37, 401 Wis. 2d 678, 974 N.W.2d 422, which held that an OWI penalty cannot be increased because of a prior revocation stemming from a refusal to submit a warrantless blood draw. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 20, 2022
Wood County v. J.L.S., 2022AP299, 8/25/22, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
The circuit court entered orders for initial commitment order and involuntary medication order. Later (not sure how much later), the County persuaded the circuit court to dismiss these orders. On appeal, J.L.S. argued, among other things, that the appeal of orders was not moot due to their collateral consequences. The County filed a letter saying that it wouldn’t file a response brief because J.L.S. “correctly set forth the law in her brief.” The court of appeals deemed this letter to mean that the county did not oppose J.L.S.’s request to have both orders reversed outright. And so it reversed them.
{ }
by admin
on September 18, 2022
On August 31, 2022, the court of appeals ordered publication of the following criminal law related decisions: [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 18, 2022
State v. James P. Killian, 2022 WI App 43; review granted 1/20/23; reversed, 2023 WI 52; case activity (including briefs)
The state provoked a mistrial in a case charging Killian with child sexual assault offenses against two complainants. The circuit court later dismissed the case due to the prosecutor’s misconduct. When the state recharged Killian with sexual offenses against the same complainants the circuit court dismissed the new case as a violation of double jeopardy. The court of appeals affirms.
[continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 18, 2022
State v. Jamie Lee Weigel, 2022 WI App 48; case activity (including briefs)
In Wisconsin criminal law, the word “sentence” is sometimes used generically to include probation; other times it’s used in a technical sense to refer only to imprisonment, and thus excludes probation. See, e.g., State v. Fearing, 2000 WI App 229, ¶6, 239 Wis. 2d 105, 619 N.W.2d 115. In this case the state attempts to defend its breach of a plea agreement by saying its agreement to cap its “sentence” recommendation referred to the technical meaning of “sentence,” and thus allowed it to also make a recommendation for consecutive probation. The court of appeals isn’t persuaded. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 18, 2022
State v. Eric J. Debrow, 2021AP1732, 7/21/22, District 4 (not recommended for publication); petition for review granted, 12/15/22, reversed, 2023 WI 54; case activity (including briefs)
The court of appeals holds Debrow is entitled to a new trial because of the unfair prejudice caused by one witness’s testimony that would have led the jury to conclude Debrow had a prior criminal conviction that led the witness to be “on alert” when Debrow went into the bedroom of two children. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on September 18, 2022
State v. Travis D. Huss, 2021AP1858, 7/20/22, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Huss was stopped at 1 a.m. for going through a flashing red light without stopping. The officer suspected he was impaired and eventually arrested him for OWI. Huss asked the officer to give him a preliminary breath test before she arrested him, but the circuit court excluded evidence of his request from being admitted at trial. The court’s ruling was not an erroneous exercise of discretion. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on August 14, 2022
State v. Kallie M. Gajewski, 2020AP7-CR, District 3, 8/2/22 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Police arrested Gajewski in the curtilage of her home without a warrant and exigent circumstances. While this makes the arrest unlawful, the evidence obtained from the arrest is not subject to suppression because police had probable cause to arrest her. [continue reading…]
{ }
