03-2687 In Re: the Termination of Parental Rights to Reynaldo F.

Listen to this article

“Under these circumstances, there is no chance that the judgment of guilt will be reversed. There is no chance that a successful appeal could result in an acquittal of the conviction for the parent.

“Thus, the pendency of the appeal in this case does not affect the final judgment of guilty rendered by the trial court. In this situation, waiting for the appellate decision would run counter to the legislature’s intent that termination cases be handled with great speed to ensure the welfare of the children involved.”

Further the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it excluded all evidence related to the existence of the life and death of the victim’s twin brother.

“We conclude that the story is incomplete without the evidence related to Raymon. Reynaldo was the second baby thrown. The facts demonstrate that Christal first threw Raymon and then buckled Raymon into his car seat. She then picked Reynaldo up and threw him toward his car seat. Because the trial court excluded all evidence of Raymon, Christal’s counsel was able to present disingenuous arguments to the jury, including the argument that what occurred to Reynaldo was the result of a ‘split second of bad judgment.’ In reality, Christal had a chance to reconsider her behavior before throwing the second baby….

“The facts involving these twin boys were so interconnected that excluding the existence and death of one resulted in an untrue and incomplete story being presented to the jury. Although we agree with the trial court that the homicide of Raymon may be prejudicial, we disagree that it was so unduly prejudicial as to substantially outweigh the probative value of the existence and death of Raymon. The evidence related to Reynaldo’s twin brother was required for the jury to understand the circumstances surrounding Christal’s ability to assume responsibility for Reynaldo.”

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Wall, J., Wedemeyer, P.J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Carol C. Petersen, Milwaukee

For Respondent: Chris L. Hartley, Milwaukee