Wisconsin Supreme Court Accepts Six New Cases, Including Issue of Inherent Authority of Wisconsin Appellate Courts to Grant a New Trial in the Interests of Justice

Supreme Court sealOn March 2, the Wisconsin Supreme Court accepted six new cases for review, five criminal cases and one civil case.

The first case, State v. Henley, 2008AP697, presents an interesting issue regarding the authority of the courts of appeal, or the supreme court, to grant a new trial to a criminal defendant in the interests of justice, without regard to the passing of the time for appeal.  As Judges Vergeront, Lundsten, and Bridge explained in their certification of the questions in the case,

Continue ReadingWisconsin Supreme Court Accepts Six New Cases, Including Issue of Inherent Authority of Wisconsin Appellate Courts to Grant a New Trial in the Interests of Justice

Favorite Wisconsin Cases to Teach: State v. Stewart

Kodanko waits alone for the bus in a three-sided plexiglass bus shelter in downtown Milwaukee.  Three men approach.  Stewart and Moore enter the bus shelter, while their companion, Levy, remains outside.  They block Kodanko’s exit from the shelter.  Stewart says to Kodanko, “Give us some change, man.”  When Kodanko refuses, Stewart repeats his request three or four time in an increasingly loud voice.  Stewart then begins to reach into his coat.  Moore says, “Put that gun away.”  At the same time, Levy enters the shelter and tells his companions, “Let’s go.”  The three of them enter a restaurant across the street.  Moore returns a few minutes later to make small talk with Kodanko.  In due course, the police arrest Stewart for attempted robbery.  But was it really a robbery attempt, or just aggressive panhandling?

This is the subject of State v. Stewart, 420 N.W.2d 44 (Wis. 1988), which I teach in my Criminal Law course.  The case resonates with me on several different levels.

Continue ReadingFavorite Wisconsin Cases to Teach: State v. Stewart

Favorite Wisconsin Cases to Teach: State v. Oakley

It’s unusual for a law review in one state to devote an issue to a decision from the supreme court of another state, but that’s exactly what happened when the Western New England Law Review published a 2004 symposium issue concerning State v. Oakley, 629 N.W.2d 200 (Wis. 2001).  I personally welcome the opportunity to teach and, in the process, critique the decision.

The case involved David Oakley, who fathered nine children with four women and was impossibly behind on his child support payments.  Manitowoc County Circuit Court Judge Fred Hazlewood placed Oakley on probation following his conviction for refusing to support his children.  However, the probation was conditioned on Oakley having no more children until he could support the ones he already had.  A four-judge majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court confirmed Hazlewood’s order. 

Commentators predictably discussed the decision’s ramifications for the right to procreate and the larger right to privacy. 

Continue ReadingFavorite Wisconsin Cases to Teach: State v. Oakley
Newer Posts
Older Posts