Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

High court gives DAs deadline in John Doe case

By: Erika Strebel, [email protected]//December 7, 2015//

High court gives DAs deadline in John Doe case

By: Erika Strebel, [email protected]//December 7, 2015//

Listen to this article

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has issued an order giving the district attorneys involved in the now-defunct John Doe investigation of Gov. Scott Walker’s campaign a deadline for intervening in the case.

The court issued an order Friday evening stating that the five district attorneys involved in the case have until Dec. 18 to file a motion to intervene. Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and Rebecca Bradley did not participate. Justice Shirley Abrahamson dissented, noting that the justices do not explain in the order what they would do with any motion that one or more of the district attorneys file.

The order comes two days after the court removed special prosecutor Francis Schmitz from the investigation and denied, in a 4-1 per curiam decision released Wednesday, his request for the high court to reconsider shutting down the investigation. However, Schmitz is the only named defendant in the case, leaving it unclear how the case would be appealed in light of Wednesday’s order.

READ OUR RELATED CASE DIGEST

The court had shut down the secret investigation in July, finding that Schmitz had been improperly appointed and ordering that all evidence be returned to its owners and copies destroyed.

Abrahamson’s dissent also objected to the deadline she was given to write her dissent. She noted that that the order was circulated on Wednesday, the day the per curiam was released, and that the four other justices gave her until 4 p.m. Friday to submit her dissent so that the order could be released by the end of day. Abrahamson also argued that they had told her that if she did not meet the deadline, the order would be issued with a note saying that a separate writing would follow.

“The court’s practice in the instant order is disrespectful of minority views and contrary to the way a collegial court should act,” Abrahamson wrote in her dissent Friday.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests