WisBar Court Review

WisBar Court Review, published by the State Bar of Wisconsin, includes summaries and analysis of decisions from the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, as well as other court developments.

Subscribe via RSS
Visit Blog
By: State Bar of Wisconsin​

Blog Authors

State Bar of Wisconsin
David W. Runke And Timothy M. Barber
Jay D. Jerde
Aaron Earlywine
Joe Forward
Joe Forward
Jeff M. Brown

Latest from WisBar Court Review

Stock Photo of a Demand Letter

March 4, 2026 – The Wisconsin Consumer Act (WCA) allowed the defendant to remedy the claim with the individual plaintiff, preventing a class action lawsuit, a 6-1 majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided in Gudex v. Franklin Collection Service, Inc., 2026 WI 6.

Reversing the Milwaukee County Circuit Court, Justice Brian K. Hagedorn for the majority wrote, “when a customer brings a class action for damages under” Wis. Stat. section 426.110(4)(c) “requires an appropriate remedy be given

…
Continue Reading Supreme Court: WCA ‘Appropriate Remedy’ Prevents Class Action

Stock Image of Dispensed Pills
Feb. 25, 2026 – An appeal challenging the constitutionality of involuntary medication to restore a defendant’s competency to stand trial gave the Wisconsin Supreme Court the opportunity to set standards of review for the
Sell factors in
State v. J.D.B., 2026 WI 5. Justice Brian K. Hagedorn, writing for the 6-1 majority, said “we independently conclude – and agree with the circuit court – that the [s]tate has an important interest in prosecuting Jared for his serious crime

…
Continue Reading Wisconsin Supreme Court Sets Involuntary Medication Standards of Review

stock photoFeb. 24, 2026 – Google’s scan of four files that its employee confirmed contained child sexual abuse material (CSAM) operated outside of the Fourth Amendment as a private search, the Wisconsin Supreme Court unanimously decided today in State v. Rauch Sharak, 2026 WI 4.

“Google scanned and viewed Rauch Sharak’s files on its own. It had a business reason to do so. Law enforcement became involved only after Google submitted a CyberTip,” summarized Justice Janet C. Protasiewicz, who

…
Continue Reading Wisconsin Supreme Court: Google was a Private Actor in File Search

Stock Photo of Cell Phone and Magnifying Glass
​​
Jan. 23, 2026 – The Fourth Amendment’s private search doctrine protected a warrantless view of a video that Snapchat flagged as child sexual abuse material (CSAM), a majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday in State v. Gasper, 2026 WI 3.

“The government did not exceed the scope of Snapchat’s search when it viewed the video because any expectation of privacy [Michael Joseph] Gasper may have had in the video was frustrated by the private

…
Continue Reading Wisconsin Supreme Court: Video View OK Within Private Search

stock photo

Dec. 16, 2025 – A car enthusiast who likes vanity plates to express his opinions recently lost his First Amendment claim on summary judgment before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.

The court in M J Nichols Company, Inc. v. Thompson, No. 24-cv-566-amb (W.D. Wis., Dec. 12, 2025), held that a license plate is government speech.

Whether the language on a license plate is individual expression or government speech to which the First Amendment doesn’t

…
Continue Reading U.S. District Court: First Amendment Doesn’t Protect ‘RD RRAGE’

stock photo
Nov. 25, 2025 – In what may be the first case of its kind, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in

State v. Melssen, No. 2024AP1942-CR (Nov. 20, 2025) (recommended for publication) vacated an order denying suppression of evidence obtained from an overly broad search of a smartphone. Presiding Judge Rachel A. Graham, writing for the unanimous three-judge panel, concluded “the warrant to search [Emil] Melssen’s smartphone – which authorized officers to search virtually all of the messages, images,

…
Continue Reading Court of Appeals: Smartphone Search Unconstitutionally Overbroad

stock photo of a hemp plant
Nov. 12, 2025 – A required administrative referral for criminal prosecution didn’t apply for allegedly breaking controlled substances laws, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals recently held in
State v. Syrrakos, No. 2024AP554-CR and
State v. Shattuck, No. 2024AP556-CR (Oct. 29, 2025) (recommended for publication). The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the consolidated cases against Christopher J. Syrrakos and Kristyn A. Shattuck to Waukesha County Circuit Court. The circuit court dismissed the cases because the Department of

…
Continue Reading Court of Appeals: Controlled Substance Violation Doesn't Get Hemp Regulatory Protection

Stock Photo of a Jury
Oct. 14, 2025 – A circuit court’s failure to instruct the jury to decide on each period of abandonment denied a mother due process protection of a five-sixths verdict, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals decided in

S. S. v. A. S.-P., No. 2024AP2532 (Sept. 23, 2025) (recommended for publication). The decision clarifies “unsettled law,” justifying reversal of the Brown County Circuit Court verdict for plain error. “When multiple periods of abandonment are alleged, that statute requires the jury

…
Continue Reading Court of Appeals: Separate Abandonment Claims Require Separate Verdicts

Stock Photo of Blurred Mental Hospital Hallway

Oct. 14, 2025 – The statute setting requirements for recommitting an individual that the circuit court had conditionally released after a verdict of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect the Wisconsin Court of Appeals found unconstitutional in State v. ​Wilhite, No. 2024AP2177-CR (Sept. 25, 2025) (recommended for publication).

Due process requires a finding of dangerousness, explained Presiding Judge JoAnn F. Kloppenburg for the unanimous panel, including Judges Brian W. Blanchard and Jennifer E. Nashold.

The

…
Continue Reading Court of Appeals: Dangerousness Necessary to Support Recommittal

Stock Image of a No Symbol before Gavel
Sept. 22, 2025 – Two state statutes that covered the same criminal act – one that required a mandatory minimum sentence – were not unconstitutional under federal and state precedent, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, District I recently held in

State v. Kenyon, No. 2022AP2228-CR (Sept. 16, 2025) (recommended for publication). “[W]e find no case that stands for or even implicitly supports the proposition that a trial penalty is imposed when the State chooses to charge a defendant

…
Continue Reading Court of Appeals: No ‘Trial Penalty’ for Different Sentences in Similar Statutes

Stock Photo

Sept. 2, 2025 – A police request to enter an apartment to search for a missing child – when they really sought evidence of drug dealing – voided any consent that the defendant may have given, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin decided in U.S.A. v. Jose Angel Hernandez-Pineda, No. 25-CR-64 (Aug. 25, 2025), available at 2025 WL 2438683.

“In this case, the officers told Hernandez-Pineda that they needed to get into his home to

…
Continue Reading U.S. District Court Suppresses Evidence: Police Ruse Defeats Voluntary Consent

Stock Photo Showing First Amendment to U.S. Constitution

Aug. 18, 2025 – The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s (UW) removal of Madeline Krasno’s comments on its Facebook and Instagram posts violated the First Amendment because its policies were not reasonable or content-neutral, a 2-1 majority on a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held in

Madeline Krasno v. Jennifer Mnookin, No. 22-3170 (Aug. 1, 2025).

“In short, [UW’s] inflexible and context-blind keyword filters do not reasonably further its ‘off-topic’ justification when there is no way

…
Continue Reading Seventh Circuit: U.W.’s Blocking ‘Off Topic’ Comments Violated First Amendment

Stock Photo of Unlocked Handcuffs​​
Aug. 12, 2025 – A mistrial based on a misunderstanding of Wisconsin’s
State v. Denny led to unconstitutional double jeopardy, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held recently in

Mitchell D. Green v. Milwaukee County Circuit Court, No. 24-2980 (Aug. 1, 2025). The reversal of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin resulted in Green receiving the requested writ of habeas corpus, freeing him from retrial. “By relying on a mistake

…
Continue Reading Seventh Circuit: No ‘Manifest Necessity’ for Mistrial Requires Reversal

Stock photo of hands around prison bars
July 29, 2025 – The Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed that Luis A. Ramirez’s constitutional claim for a speedy trial violation failed, with five justices joining most of the majority opinion in

State v. Ramirez, 2025 WI 28 (June 27, 2025). “At  most, we could assign the State responsibility for 958 days of delay, caused by neutral reasons weighed against the State, but not heavily,” wrote Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley for the 5-2 majority opinion. “Ramirez waited 32 months

…
Continue Reading Supreme Court: Speedy Trial Not Violated After 46 months

Stock Photo of Police Car Lights

July 29, 2025 – Flight from domestic violence excused driving with a prohibited alcohol concentration (PAC) but not long enough as a defense when police stopped the victim, six Wisconsin Supreme Court justices agreed in State v. Stetzer, 2025 WI 34 (July 3, 2025).

“[T]he circuit court correctly required that all elements of the coercion defense be met for the entire duration of [Joan L.] Stetzer’s ongoing, otherwise-criminal act and considered Stetzer’s personal history when evaluating the reasonableness

…
Continue Reading Wisconsin Supreme Court: Coercion Defense Didn’t Last

Stock Photo of Gavel, Court Papers, and Computer

July 29, 2025 – The circuit court’s dismissal of a second conviction, which it reinstated after the Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed on the remaining guilty verdict, did not violate the defendants’ rights, the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed in State v. Carl Lee McAdory, 2025 WI 30.

Five justices had one justification for upholding the conviction reinstatement while two others proposed to reverse precedent they said was inconsistent with the statute’s plain meaning.

“[W]e hold that the circuit

…
Continue Reading State Supreme Court Upholds Reinstatement of Conviction in OWI Case