by admin
on April 28, 2022
State v. Tomas Jaymitchell Hoyle, 2020AP1876-CR, 4/26/22, District 3 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
Hoyle chose to remain silent at his trial for child sexual assault. During closing arguments, the prosecutor repeatedly argued that the testimony from “Hannah” (the complaining witness) was “uncontroverted” and told the jury it had “heard no evidence” and that there was “absolutely no evidence” disputing her account of the alleged sexual assault. Under the circumstances of this case, the court of appeals holds that the prosecutor’s arguments violated Hoyle’s Fifth Amendment rights. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 26, 2022
State v. A.P., 2022AP95-97, 4/26/22, District 1 (1-judge opinion, ineligble for publication); case activity
Seems like we went years without a defense win in a TPR appeal. Then–just like that–we get 4 citable defense wins in 9 months. See also this win, this win, and this win! At the disposition stage in A.P.’s case, the circuit court was supposed to consider the 6 “best interests of the children” factors, but it only considered 5. The testimony on the missing factor was conflicting. Thus, the court of appeals reversed this TPR and remanded for further proceedings. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 26, 2022
State v. Rodney J. Ofte, 2021AP1302-CR, 4/21/22, District 4 (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
After the State charged Ofte with OWI 2nd, he moved for suppression because Deputy Paulson had interrogated him in the back of a locked squad car without a Miranda warning. The circuit court suppressed all evidence from that point on–Ofte’s statement and the results of his FSTs and breathalyzer test. The State appealed arguing that Ofte was not in custody for 5th Amendment purposes. The court of appeals disagrees. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 26, 2022
The latest edition of SCOWstats reports that from 2019-2021 SCOW issued defense wins in 38% of 4th Amendment cases. Believe it or not, that is cause for celebration! It dwarfs the percentages of 4A victories in terms reaching back to 1995-1996. Historically, which justices have been most (and least) receptive to 4A arguments? Find out here.
{ }
by admin
on April 25, 2022
State v. Antonio Darnell Mays, 2022 WI App 24; case activity (including briefs)
Mays was accused of forcing his way into an apartment with and firing a gun at at least one of its occupants. One occupant fired back; in the end, two people were dead. The state initially charged Mays with, among other things, a reckless homicide for each of the deaths. But when, at trial, the evidence suggested that one of the decedents had been shot not by Mays, but by the occupant returning fire at Mays, the state moved to amend the information as to that death to charge felony murder instead. Mays opposed the amendment, and ultimately the state instead convinced the court to instruct the jury on felony murder as a lesser-included offense of reckless homicide. The jury convicted Mays of this lesser-included (and other counts). [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 25, 2022
State v. Teresa L. Clark, 2022 WI 21, 4/20/22, reversing the circuit court on bypass, case activity (including briefs)
A defendant may collaterally attack a prior OWI conviction if she was not represented by counsel and did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive the right to counsel during that proceeding. Once she points to evidence of this claim, the burden shifts to State to prove a valid waiver. In a split opinion, SCOW now holds that if the transcript of the prior OWI hearing is unavailable, the burden doesn’t shift. The defendant must prove that her right to counsel was in fact violated–which is virtually impossible. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 25, 2022
Sheboygan County DH&HS v. E.C., 2021AP1655, 4/20/22, District 2; (1-judge opinion, ineligible for publication); case activity
While “Nina” was married to “John,” she became pregnant with “Eric’s” baby. A court found the baby to be a “child in need of protective services” and gave the standard TPR warning to Nina, but not to Eric. Afterward, Eric established that he was the baby’s father. When the court terminated his parental rights in this case, he argued that his exclusion from the earlier CHIPS proceeding violated his right to due process and provided “good cause” for failing to establish a substantial relationship with the baby. The court of appeals rejected both arguments. [continue reading…]
{ }
by admin
on April 24, 2022
State v. Bradley C. Burgess, 2021AP1067-CR, District 4, 4/21/22 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
A traffic stop should last only as long as necessary for the police to complete the “mission” of investigating the traffic infraction that justified the stop, including ordinary inquiries incident to the stop. Rodriguez v. U.S., 575 U.S. 348 (2015); State v. Smith, 2018 WI 2, 379 Wis. 2d 86, 905 N.W.2d 353. Applying that standard here, the court of appeals holds the stop of the car Burgess was riding in wasn’t unreasonably extended by the officer’s asking the passengers for identification and running records checks on them. [continue reading…]
{ }
