The Wisconsin Court of Appeals yesterday affirmed the conviction of Kimberly Zapata, who unsuccessfully urged the court to overturn her convictions for voter fraud and public-office misconduct, arguing she was a whistleblower.
A unanimous jury convicted Zapata in March 2024. The charges included one count of felony misconduct in public office and three misdemeanor counts of making a false statement to obtain or vote an absentee ballot.
Milwaukee Circuit Court Judge Kori Ashley sentenced Zapata to nine months in jail, stayed in favor of 12 months of probation and 120 hours of community service.
The opinion, written by Judge Sara Geenen and joined by Chief Judge Joseph Donald and Presiding Judge Pedro Colón, outlines Zapata’s scheme.
Frustrated by the ease with which individuals could obtain absentee military ballots, Zapata requested three, one each for a fictitious Holly Jones, Holly Adams, and Holly Brandtjen.
She assigned each a random home address in Milwaukee, Shorewood, and Menomonee Falls. She picked municipalities where she thought the clerks would not notice fraud.
Then, using “WisVote”—a secure, employee-access, statewide voter registration database—Zapata retrieved the home address of “a state legislator because the legislator was the most vocal election fraud politician that she knew.” She had the absentee ballots mailed to the legislator.
Clerks in all three municipalities mailed absentee ballots to the legislator’s address.
Zapata presented a two-fold argument to the Court of Appeals. First, she contended that her conduct was not “for the purpose of obtaining” an absentee ballot because she intended that the absentee ballots be acquired by someone else. Second, she argued there was insufficient evidence to convict her of misconduct in public office because she was acting as a concerned private citizen demonstrating a loophole.
Regarding whether Zapata generated the false ballots “for the purpose of obtaining” absentee ballots, Zapata argued that “obtaining” an absentee ballot meant physical possession.
But the court agreed with the state that “obtaining” included constructive possession. “(B)y requesting the ballots, Zapata set off a series of actions she knew the ballots would be subjected to,” Geenen wrote.
While Zapata argued for a more rigid definition of “obtaining,” which is not defined by the statute, she “knew that by requesting the ballots, the ballots would be generated under the fake names that she provided” and “that the ballots, once generated per her request, would be sent to the address that she provided,” Geenen said.
“Zapata controlled both the names under which the ballots would be generated and the destination to which those ballots would be sent.”
Whether Zapata acted in her official capacity required “a material connection between the public official’s duties and powers and the forbidden act,” Geenen wrote.
The court found such a connection. Zapata used her work laptop to request the ballots, her employee credentials to access the WisVote administrative website, and her administrative knowledge to target specific municipalities for sending ballots. All weighed against Zapata’s argument that she acted as a private citizen.
“In our view, the State established a material connection between Zapata’s election fraud and the powers and duties inherent to her public office,” wrote Geenen.
The court’s decision comes several weeks after another individual, Harry Wait, was convicted as of fraud and identify theft after requesting ballots on behalf of Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Racine Mayor Cory Mason in the same election cycle. Wait also purportedly sought to illuminate vulnerabilities in the voting system.