Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Case Digests/page 898

Case Digests

00-3490 State v. Seay

The Court concluded that the absence of a signature on a notice of appeal filed by a pro se appellant does not compel dismissal of the appeal. While a notice of appeal must be signed, ‘if the notice is timely filed and adequate in other respects, jurisdiction will vest in the court of appeals [and] the case may proceed so ...

Read More »

01-1102-CR State v. Denure

Dennis Denure appeals from a judgment of conviction for operating a motor vehicle with a prohibited blood alcohol concentration. Denure argues that the circuit court erred when it denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained after a subpoena was issued under Wis. Stat. § 968.135. He contends that probable cause does not support the subpoena. We agree and therefore reverse. ...

Read More »

01-1473 State v. Espinoza

“The State argues that ‘Espinoza’s denial of involvement in a crime which there is probable cause to believe he committed, as a matter of law, establishes probable cause that he also committed the crime of o[b]structing.’ This broad, sweeping contention disregards the principle of Peters [v. State, 70 Wis.2d 22], which states that before a charge is made under Wis. ...

Read More »

88-1616 In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Robert J. Hyndman, Attorney at Law

“[W]e acknowledge that under former SCR 21.03(5), which was in effect at the time of Hyndman’s revocation, it was expressly stated that the imposition of discipline for misconduct is not intended as a punishment for wrongdoing; rather, discipline is imposed to protect the public, the courts, and the legal profession. Our review of the record in this matter now leads ...

Read More »

01-0814 In re: the Return of Property in State v. Bergquist

“The criminal code increases the penalty for an offender who commits a crime while possessing, using, or threatening to use a dangerous weapon. Wis. Stat. sec. 939.63. The increased penalty is intended to discourage the use of dangerous weapons in the commission of crimes by creating fear of additional punishment. Logically, the loss of dangerous weapons through forfeiture is also ...

Read More »

95-0536 In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against David V. Penn, Attorney at Law

And, in response to the referee’s procedural questions, We believe that the rules contemplate that the referee conducting a hearing on the petition for reinstatement must engage in a full and unrestricted evaluation of the petitioner’s past, present, and predicted future behavior, as well as any other relevant information going to the issue of whether the petitioner has the moral ...

Read More »

01-0904 State v. Stout

Based on case law and the explicit language of Wis. Stat. Sec. 968.24 that a “law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place,” we conclude that under Wisconsin law, Terry applies to confrontations between the police and citizens in public places only. For private residences and hotels, in the absence of a warrant, the police must have ...

Read More »

00-1563 State v. Anderson

Further, recognizing that a jury trial involves a fundamental right, we mandate the use of a personal colloquy in every case where a criminal defendant seeks to waive his or her right to a jury trial. “We hold that the circuit court must hold an evidentiary hearing on whether the waiver of the right to a jury trial was knowing, ...

Read More »

01-0982 Tabbutt v. Goree

Robert Goree appeals an order enjoining him from having any contact with Patricia Tabbutt. He claims that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to show that he had been harassing Tabbutt; (2) the trial court violated his due process rights by denying him the right to present witnesses on his behalf; and (3) the terms of the injunction were overly broad. ...

Read More »

00-0744 State v. Nollie

This is so because a general and potential threat of interference is not enough to invoke the self-defense privilege; the threat must be imminent and specific. Although defendant claimed that four men were also in the parking lot at the time, there was no indication that the men accosted him or threatened him – or even noticed defendant at the ...

Read More »

01-0835-CR State v. Weishar

Randy A. Weishar appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict convicting him of criminal damage to property. The jury acquitted Weishar of the crime of failing to give information or render aid following his striking an occupied vehicle. The sole issue argued on appeal is whether the trial court erred when it denied Weishar’s motion to dismiss the ...

Read More »

01-1555 Culver v. City of Milwaukee, et al.

“Although the class was rightly decertified, and the suit, having thus been demoted to an individual action, therefore rightly dismissed because Culver’s claim had become moot, there is a loose end. Rule 23(e) requires that notice of a proposed dismissal ‘be given to all members of the class.’ The purpose is to enable the class members to protect their interests ...

Read More »

01-0937-CR, 01-0938-CR State v. Meyer

Douglas Meyer appeals a judgment convicting him on his guilty pleas of retail theft as a repeater in Pierce County and possession of burglary tools as a repeater in St. Croix County. He also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion. Meyer argues that he should be allowed to withdraw his pleas or be resentenced because: (1) the State did ...

Read More »

01-1849 Longstreet v. Illinois Department of Corrections

“[W]e cannot conclude that an employer is subject to what amounts to strict liability for every second incident of harassment committed by an employee, especially when the first incident was far less serious than the second. Had Bester’s acts toward Terry been more severe-and as a result he had merely been reassigned to another duty station-we would be faced with ...

Read More »

01-0140-CR State v. Johnson

George Johnson appeals a judgment convicting him of two counts of incest with his adult daughter, M.J. Johnson’s defense asserted that she was not his daughter or that he did not know she was his daughter. The State proved those elements by her testimony, statements he made to the police, a birth certificate and the results of a DNA test. ...

Read More »

01-1380 U.S. v. Alshabkhoun

“We agree with A&A that access to the courts is of paramount importance. However, it does not follow that an agreed upon provision that allows for the accrual of stipulated penalties during any dispute resolution is unenforceable as a matter of public policy. It is undisputed that this Consent Decree was drafted and negotiated by both parties and entered into ...

Read More »

00-3333 In Re: the Paternity of Roger D.H. v. Virginia O.

“The circuit court may have believed that the United States Supreme Court imposed such a requirement in Troxel [v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000). If so, we disagree. There is no suggestion in Troxel that a court may only interfere with a parent’s decision regarding visitation if the parent is shown to be unfit. Rather, the Troxel Court’s parental fitness ...

Read More »

01-0347-CR State v. Delgado

Carlos R. Delgado appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of two counts of first-degree sexual assault of a child. He also appeals from an order denying his postconviction motion. Delgado argues that his conviction should be reversed because an expert witness violated the Haseltine rule by vouching for the credibility of the victims. He also ...

Read More »

01-2611 Piggie v. McBride

“Because the district court applied that presumption in vacating its judgment and denying habeas relief in this case, we remand the case to the district court to determine (1) whether the surveillance tape has been erased by prison officials, and if so, when did they erase it; and (2) whether Piggie requested through authorized prison officials that the CAB view ...

Read More »

01-1679 State v. Gordon

“The trial court did not recite the jury instruction on first-degree recklessly endangering safety. Rather, it simply responded to the jury’s specific and logical inquiry by explaining that the crime of first-degree recklessly endangering safety involves an additional element – the defendant must act with utter disregard for human life. Additionally, the trial court made it abundantly clear that Gordon ...

Read More »

01-2153-CR State v. Borum

Torrence C. Borum, pro se, appeals from a judgment entered after he pled guilty to one count of battery. He claims the trial court erred when it denied his motion seeking to withdraw his guilty plea. Because the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion when it denied Borum’s motion to withdraw his plea, this court affirms. This opinion ...

Read More »

01-1720 Eads v. Hanks

“Eads] claims that the proceeding denied him due process of law because (he alleges) a member of the committee is the ‘live-in boyfriend’ of one of the witnesses, a female guard… Oddly, we cannot find an appellate case dealing with the cognate issue of bias in prison disciplinary committees. The requirements of due process are considerably relaxed in the setting ...

Read More »

01-0962 State ex rel. West v. Bartow, Warden

Accordingly, we affirm the order transferring venue to Milwaukee County. “The trial court obviously determined that the interests of justice and the convenience of the parties or witnesses necessitated a change of venue to Milwaukee county. The trial court’s failure to use the ‘magic words’ of Wis. Stat. ‘ 801.52 does not amount to reversible error. [Citation]. While the trial ...

Read More »

01-1984-CR State v. Scharenbroch

The State appeals an order dismissing its complaint against Danita Scharenbroch. The State charged Scharenbroch with violating a court order, as a party to a crime. The trial court dismissed the action because it concluded that violating a sec. 940.47 order was not a “crime.” Therefore, Scharenbroch could not be charged as a party to the crime of violating sec. ...

Read More »

00-3400 U.S. v. Colvin

“[W]e believe the ‘deadly or dangerous weapon or device’ language added by the 1988 amendment makes clear Congress’ intent to authorize cumulative punishment of fire-related felonies. The 1988 amendment clarified that ‘any felony’ ‘includ[es] a felony which provides for an enhanced punishment if committed by the use of a deadly or dangerous weapon or device.’ As we explained in Hayward, ...

Read More »

01-1042 Lloyd v. Firstar Bank Fond du Lac, et al.

Lewis Lloyd appeals from the order denying various motions, including his motion to vacate the order dismissing the underlying action. The issue on appeal is whether the appellant established excusable neglect for his failure to appear at two hearings on his motion to vacate. Because we conclude that the appellant has not established excusable neglect, we affirm the order of ...

Read More »

01-1982-CR State v. Marshalek

The State appeals the trial court’s order granting Michael A. Marshalek’s motion to suppress the results of a traffic stop and dismiss the offenses against him. The State argues that based upon the totality of the circumstances, the officer had reasonable suspicion to stop and temporarily detain Marshalek. We affirm the order of the trial court. This opinion will not ...

Read More »

00-3111 U.S. v. Childs

“By asking one question about marijuana, officer Chiola did not make the custody of Childs an ‘unreasonable’ seizure. What happened here must occur thousands of times daily across the nation: Officers ask persons stopped for traffic offenses whether they are committing any other crimes. That is not an unreasonable law- enforcement strategy, either in a given case or in gross; ...

Read More »

01-1048 Morales v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company appeals an order denying its motions to set aside a default judgment and enlarge the time to answer the complaint, or, in the alternative, to reopen the issue of damages. Liberty argues that the circuit court erred by denying its motions because: (1) the default judgment was void; and (2) there was excusable neglect. We conclude ...

Read More »

01-2283-CR State v. Chapman

Geoffrey Chapman appeals his conviction for operating a vehicle while intoxicated, third offense. He argues that his motion to suppress the evidence of intoxication should have been granted because he was seized without reasonable suspicion. We reject the argument and affirm. This opinion will not be published. Dist II, Winnebago County, Carver, J., Brown, J. Attorneys: For Appellant: Mark R. ...

Read More »