State v. Nicholas J. Nero, 2023AP543, District III, 6/10/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA found that law enforcement had probable cause that Nicholas Nero was driving under the influence, independent from his compelled statement to his probation officer and un-Mirandized statement to a deputy sheriff, and therefore affirmed the circuit court’s order denying his motion to suppress the results of his blood draw.  The COA also found that Nero’s claims for ineffective assistance of…
Continue Reading COA: Sufficient evidence to request blood draw independent from defendant’s compelled statements; defendant’s IAC claims were conclusory and undeveloped.

State v. Derek J. Jarvi 2023AP2136-CR, 6/12/25, District IV (not recommended for publication); case activity
Despite the State’s efforts to overturn Jarvi’s postconviction win of a new trial, the court of appeals rejects the State’s evidentiary arguments and holds that it failed to prove harmless error in this case.
Jarvi was convicted of second-degree sexual assault of a person under the influence of an intoxicant contrary to § 940.225(2)(cm) following a jury trial. (¶1). The issue presented…
Continue Reading Defense Win: COA holds that circuit court wrongly limited defendant’s testimony; holds error is not harmless

We made the mistake of waiting to consolidate our monthly digest given the slow pace of the court. Turns out there’s a lot to post on! This installment features an interesting decision on child porn possession, multiple alleged Franks violations,  some Fourth Amendment wrangling, disturbing prisoner abuse in Wisconsin institutions, and a handful of non-Wisconsin habeas cases!
United States of America v. Michael Clark, No. 24-1403: This is a Wisconsin-originating case involving an alleged Franks violation. The Seventh previously remanded…
Continue Reading Seventh Circuit Cases for April and May

State v. T.A.W., 2025AP437-CR, 6/3/25, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity
Although the charges against T.A.W. — resisting an officer causing soft tissue injury and retail theft — are not “serious crimes” under Wis. Stat. § 969.08, which specifies procedures for pretrial release, the COA found that the State met its burden to show an important governmental interest in forcibly medicating T.A.W. to competency under the aggravated circumstances of the case.
T.A.W. (referred to as Thomas)…
Continue Reading COA: State has important interest, for purposes of Sell, to forcibly medicate defendant charged with resisting arrest causing soft tissue injury.

State v. Nicholas J. Bergner, 2024AP1875, District I, 6/3/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA affirmed the circuit court’s order denying Nicolas Bergner’s postconviction motion for a new trial.  Although the circuit court did not follow the procedure required by SCOW in Tucker for using a numbers-only jury selection process, to which trial counsel did not object, Bergner was not prejudiced.

Bergner was charged with one count of operating a motor vehicle while under the…
Continue Reading COA: Defendant not prejudiced at trial for OWI by ‘numbers-only’ jury selection process

State v. Benny Burgos, 2024AP1497-CR, 6/3/25, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity
In an interesting appeal presenting questions of statutory construction and appellate jurisdiction, COA uses principles of equity to reach the merits and reverses in Burgos’s favor.
Burgos was made eligible for SAP at his original sentencing in 2016. (¶2). He enrolled in the program, completed it, and obtained early release from prison. (¶3). His extended supervision was then revoked and,…
Continue Reading Defense Win: COA finds exception to potential jurisdictional defect and reverses order denying early releasing following SAP completion

State v. Johnny Ray Martin, 2023AP603, 5/28/25, District III (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity
COA rejects Martin’s claims that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion by denying his attempt to impeach the alleged victim with her prior recantation of a separate incident, and that defense counsel was ineffective by failing to adequately investigate the recantation, prepare to address the recantation at trial, and argue the issue under the correct legal theory.
The State charged Martin…
Continue Reading COA holds prior recantation of allegation made by alleged victim against same defendant inadmissible for impeachment

City of Monona v. Erick J. Erickson, 2024AP312, District IV, 5/30/25 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
The COA affirmed Erick J. Erickson’s conviction following a bench trial for operating with a prohibited alcohol concentration and revocation of his operating privileges because he unreasonably refused to submit to a preliminary breath test (PBT).  COA found that the circuit court correctly denied Erickson’s motion to suppress because police had probable cause to request the PBT and probable cause to…
Continue Reading Using umbrella for a snow shovel arouses suspicion of intoxication; COA affirms conviction for operating with prohibited alcohol concentration and refusing PBT.

State v. H.C., 2025 WI 20, 6/3/25, affirming an unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity
In a decision that has been awaited by TPR practitioners, all seven justices affirm COA’s mandate, with five justices joining in a majority opinion which concludes there is no burden of proof applicable at a dispositional hearing.
As we’ve previously summarized, the TPR statutes are silent as to whether there is a burden of proof applicable at a dispositional hearing under…
Continue Reading SCOW ends years of TPR uncertainty and clarifies there is no burden of proof applicable to a disposition hearing

William T. Case v. Montana, USSC No. 24-624, certiorari granted 6/2/25
SCOTUS added to its docket when it accepted an increasingly rare grant from state criminal proceedings in this Fourth Amendment case:
Question presented:
Whether law enforcement may enter a home without a search warrant based on less than probable cause that an emergency is occurring, or whether the emergency-aid exception requires probable cause.

This is an important Fourth Amendment case that will clarify an unresolved legal question:…
Continue Reading SCOTUS to determine whether police need probable cause that an emergency is occurring to invoke emergency aid doctrine and enter a home without a warrant

State v. Roger A. Minck, 2022AP2292-CR, 5/28/25, District III (recommended for publication); case activity
In a case of first impression, the COA held in a decision recommended for publication that hiding a corpse with intent to conceal a crime under Wis. Stat. § 940.11(2) requires the State to prove the defendant  intended to conceal any crime, not a crime related to the victim’s homicide.  The COA found the evidence sufficient to affirm the jury’s verdict finding Roger Minck…
Continue Reading COA: State does not need to prove intent to conceal victim’s homicide to prove defendant hid corpse with intent to conceal a crime.

State v. Daniel J. Rejholec, 2023AP2192-CR, 5/28/25, District II (recommended for publication); case activity
In a consequential appeal, COA holds that allocution statements are admissible evidence after a plea has been withdrawn.
Rejholec was charged with various crimes based, in large part, on his statements during an in-custody interrogation. (¶2). Rejholec moved to suppress and that motion was denied. (Id.). Thereafter, Rejholec entered a no-contest plea. (Id.). During the ensuing sentencing hearing, he made several inculpatory…
Continue Reading COA holds that allocution statements are admissible following plea withdrawal

State v. Peter J. Long, 2024AP1249-CR, 5/28/25, District II (not recommended for publication); case activity
While Long’s appeal presents some superficially interesting legal issues, ultimately COA’s dereference to the circuit court’s underlying factual findings govern the outcome here.
“Alice,” called police to report that her mother was being physically attacked by the defendant, Long. (¶2). Officers arrived, knocked on the front door, and received no response. (¶3). Officers walked to the rear of the…
Continue Reading COA holds that warrantless entry to home, authorized by young child, did not violate defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights