On Point
104 FOLLOWERS
On Point is the law blog of the Wisconsin State Public Defender that provides information about important developments in the law. The Wisconsin State Public Defender's Office (SPD) provides legal representation for persons who are accused of crimes or are defendants in certain specified civil matters, and who meet statutory financial eligibility criteria.
On Point
4d ago
Tony P. Rogers v. Jason Wells, Warden, No. 17-2903, 3/22/24 Although Rogers claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for not seeking records to impeach the credibility of his accuser in this sexual assault case, the Seventh Circuit court is unpersuaded that the high bar for habeas relief has been met and affirms the district ..read more
On Point
6d ago
March was a relatively quiet month and brought only a few cases with some relevance to our practice: United States of America v. Thomas Osadzinski., No. 22-3140: Long story short: Providing tech support to ISIS is not protected by the First Amendment. Osadzinski, a computer nerd obsessed with ISIS, made the poor choice to advertise ..read more
On Point
2w ago
State v. Iain A. Johnson, 2022AP389-CR, 4/2/24, District III (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity Although COA concedes this is a “close case,” it nevertheless concludes that the evidence satisfies the relatively low burden for reasonable suspicion to extend a traffic stop. This police contact began when they received a “driving complaint” about Johnson’s ..read more
On Point
2w ago
Dane County Department of Human Services v. J.K., 2023AP1946-47, 3/28/24, District IV (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity In a TPR appeal presenting multiple issues, COA rejects all of J.K.’s arguments and affirms. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel In this case, the petitioner moved for summary judgment with respect to grounds, “arguing that there was ..read more
On Point
2w ago
State v. Joan L. Stetzer, 2023AP874-CR, 3/27/24, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity In a difficult case demonstrating the stringent nature of Wisconsin’s coercion defense, COA affirms the circuit court’s decision that the defense did not apply to Stetzer’s conduct, notwithstanding a medley of uniquely sympathetic facts. At a court trial for ..read more
On Point
3w ago
Racine County v. C.B., 2023AP2018-FT, 3/20/24, District II (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity In a factually-specific appeal of a recommitment order, COA rejects all of C.B.’s arguments and affirms. “Banks” has been under a Chapter 51 order since 2015, following an NGI verdict in a criminal case in which he apparently fled from ..read more
On Point
3w ago
State v. Allan Nathan Carroll, Jr. A/K/A/ U’si Ch-ab, 2023AP870, 3/20/24, District 2 (one-judge appeal; ineligible for publication); case activity Carroll, Jr., a.k.a. Ch-ab, pro se, appeals a jury verdict convicting him of resisting or obstructing an officer. Ch-ab raises two claims on appeal: (1) that his constitutional rights were violated during a traffic stop ..read more
On Point
1M ago
State v. K.P., 2023AP2404-06, 3/19/24, District 1 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity K.P. (“Kevin”) challenged the circuit court’s order terminating his parental rights on two grounds: (1) that his own testimony demostrated he had a substantial relationship with his three children and (2) because there was a lack of evidence concerning the childrens ..read more
On Point
1M ago
State v. Asif Ahmed, 2023AP1796, 3/14/24, District IV (one-judge appeal; ineligible for publication); case activity Ahmed raises a few different arguments challenging the circuit court’s decision that he improperly refused to submit to a OWI blood draw, but the court of appeals rejects them all, agrees probable cause existed to arrest Ahmed for OWI, and ..read more
On Point
1M ago
Kenosha County DCFS v. J.M.C. III, 2023AP1382, 3/13/24, District 2 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity In affirming the termination of J.M.C.’s parental rights to his daughter, the court holds that (1) the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in denying J.M.C.’s request for a new attorney and (2) the circuit court’s ..read more