Ineffective Assistance of Counsel- Exclusion of Evidence of Witness Bias

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District III

Case Name: State of Wisconsin v. Charles R. Steadman II

Case No.: 2022AP001738-CR

Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz and Gill, JJ.

Focus: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel- Exclusion of Evidence of Witness Bias

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals upheld Steadman’s conviction for first-degree sexual assault of a child under the age of thirteen. The appeal involved three key arguments:

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: Steadman argued his defense counsel was constitutionally ineffective, claiming errors in trial strategy and failure to object to certain statements. The court found no merit in these claims, determining that the defense counsel’s performance did not fall below an objective standard of reasonableness and that Steadman failed to show a reasonable probability that, but for the alleged errors, the trial outcome would have been different.

Improper Comments by the State: Steadman contended that the State’s comments during closing arguments were improper and constituted plain error, arguing the prosecutor’s statements improperly shifted the burden of proof to the defense. The court, however, concluded that the prosecutor’s remarks were permissible and consistent with the context of the entire trial and were part of the prosecution’s argument that the jury should believe the victim’s testimony over the defendant’s.

Exclusion of Evidence of Witness Bias: Steadman claimed the court erred by limiting his ability to cross-examine a witness, Zoa Osimitz, about her potential bias stemming from a child custody dispute with the defendant. The court ruled that while evidence of bias is admissible, the trial court had broad discretion to impose reasonable limits to prevent unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury. The appellate court agreed with the lower court’s decision.

Affirmed.

Decided 07/16/24

Full Text