Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Statutory Interpretation

By: Derek Hawkins//April 23, 2019//

Statutory Interpretation

By: Derek Hawkins//April 23, 2019//

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District IV

Case Name: Rock County v. Brenda E. Marshall

Case No.: 2019AP219

Officials: BLANCHARD, J.

Focus: Statutory Interpretation

Brenda Marshall, pro se, appeals a judgment of conviction, resulting from a trial to the court. The conviction is for “following another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway.” See WIS. STAT. § 346.14(1m). Marshall does not offer a developed argument. I could reject her appeal on that ground. But in Marshall’s favor I assume that she intends to make the following two, closely related arguments: (1) the circuit court erred in failing to take into account the speed of a vehicle that Marshall rear-ended just before the collision, which is one fact to be considered under § 346.14(1m); (2) the circuit court clearly erred in finding that the County proved that Marshall failed to maintain a reasonable and prudent distance under the relevant circumstances. I reject these two possible arguments and affirm.

Full Text


Derek A Hawkins is trademark corporate counsel for Harley-Davidson. Hawkins oversees the prosecution and maintenance of the Harley-Davidson’s international trademark portfolio in emerging markets.

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