Sexual Assault
State v. May, 99-1647-CR
I.	THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED PREJUDICIAL ERROR IN ADMITTING A LARGE AMOUNT OF OTHER CRIMES EVIDENCE INVOLVING ANGEL JOHNSON AND MARGARET MONDAY TO IMPROPERLY BOLSTER THE CREDIBILITY OF THE VICTIMS AND FOR OTHER IMPROPER PURPOSES.
II.	UNDER STATE V. DEKEYSER, TRIAL COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO HAVE PREVENTED THE ADMISSION OF THE EXTREMELY PREJUDICIAL OTHER ACTS EVIDENCE.
III.	THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN PERMITTING THE STATE'S IMPROPER CROSS OF THE DEFENDANT AS TO THE NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF HIS PRIOR CONVICTION INVOLVING ANGEL JOHNSON AFTER THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY STATED THE NUMBER OF PRIOR CONVICTIONS.
IV.	TRIAL COUNSEL WAS INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO OBJECT TO NON-STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTION ON SEXUAL ASSAULT WHICH ALTERNATIVELY ALLOWED THE JURY TO FIND THE DEFENDANT GUILTY AS TO ALL THREE CHARGED SECOND-DEGREE SEXUAL ASSAULT OFFENSES BY FINDING GUILT AS TO ONE OR MORE COMPLAINING WITNESSES AS TO EACH ELEMENT.
V.	A NEW TRIAL SHOULD BE GRANTED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AS THE REAL ISSUE WAS NOT FULLY TRIED.
	Go To Decision
Sexual Assault of a Child
State v. Cleveland, 99-2682-CR
III.	MR. CLEVELAND'S TWO CONVICTIONS FOR TOUCHING MELISSA'S BREASTS THROUGH THE LEATHER COAT WHILE OILING THE COAT AND LIFTING HER OFF THE CHAIR VIOLATE THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY PROTECTION AGAINST MULTIPLE PUNISHMENTS FOR THE SAME OFFENSE, REQUIRING THIS COURT TO REVERSE ONE OF THE TWO CONVICTIONS.
	Go To Brief              Go To Decision
State v. Pearson, 99-2399-CR
I.	THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT ALLOWED THE PROSECUTOR TO LEAD THE CHILD WITNESS AND PERMITTED THE PROSECUTOR TO PRAISE AND ENCOURAGE THE WITNESS AS SHE TESTIFIED.
II.	THE JURY SHOULD NEVER HAVE HEARD BEVERLY DUVALL'S TESTIMONY AS IT WAS HEARSAY THAT DID NOT FALL WITHIN THE EXCITED UTTERANCE EXEPTION, OR ANY OTHER EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE.
III.	THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT ALLOWED DR. MIELKE TO REPEAT CHELSEA'S ALLEGATIONS OF ABUSE BY MR. PEARSON BECAUSE SUCH TESTIMONY DID NOT FALL WITHIN THE MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE.
IV.	THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ALLOWING MILT VIERGUTZ'S TESTIMONY BECAUSE IT DID NOT FALL WITHIN THE MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT HEARSAY EXCEPTION.
	Go To Brief              Go To Decision
State v. Perkins, 99-2585-CR
I.	MR. PERKINS' CONVICTIONS FOR TWO COUNTS OF SECOND-DEGREE SEXUAL ASSAULT OF A CHILD VIOLATE THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY PROTECTION AGAINST MULTIPLE PUNISHMENTS FOR THE SAME OFFENSE, REQUIRING THIS COURT TO REVERSE ONE OF HIS TWO CONVICTIONS.
	Go To Brief              Go To Decision
State v. Schwartz, 99-0476-CR
I.	THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL WAS VIOLATED WHEN THE COURT WOULD NOT PERMIT DEFENSE COUNSEL TO ASK THE COMPLAINAINT, KIMBERLY, IF SHE HAD LIED TO HER TEACHERS, AND PERMITTED A WITNESS, ALICIA, TO TESTIFY THAT SHE BELIEVED THE DEFENDANT HAD SEXUALLY ASSAULTED KIMBERLY.
II.	THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL AND TO PRESENT A DEFENSE WAS VIOLATED WHEN THE COURT RULED THAT SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGIST GEORGE WEISBECK WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED TO TESTIFY AS TO THE RESULTS OF HIS M-TEAM EVALUATION OF KIMBERLY.
III.	THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL AND TO PRESENT A DEFENSE WERE VIOLATED WHEN THE COURT RULED THAT SOCIAL WORKER FONSECA'S TESTIMONY REGARDING KIMBERLY'S LYING BEHAVIOR WAS IRRELEVANT.
IV.	MR. SCHWARTZ IS ENTITLED TO A NEW TRIAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE BECAUSE THE REAL CONTROVERSY WAS NOT FULLY TRIED.
	Go To Brief              Go To Decision
State v. Bradley Alan St. George, 00-2830-CR
I.	MR. ST. GEORGE WAS DENIED DUE PROCESS AND HIS RIGHT TO PRESENT A DEFENSE, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, HIS RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE COUNSEL, WHEN THE DEFENSE WAS PRECLUDED FROM INTRODUCING EVIDENCE OF PRIOR SEXUAL CONTACT INVOLVING THE CHILD COMPLAINANT AND ANOTHER CHILD OFFERED TO DEMONSTRATE AN ALTERNATIVE SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE FOR THE CHILD'S ACCUSATION OF SEXUAL CONTACT AGAINST MR. ST. GEORGE.
II.	MR. ST. GEORGE WAS DENIED DUE PROCESS AND HIS RIGHT TO PRESENT A DEFENSE WHEN THE TRIAL COURT EXCLUDED PROFFERED TESTIMONY FROM DEFENSE EXPERT DR. DONALD STONEFELD.
	Go To Brief              Go To Decision
Exploitation
State v. William J. Church, 97-3140-CR, __ Wis.2d __ ( )
III.	WHETHER THE TWO COUNTS OF CHILD ENTICEMENT WERE THE SAME IN LAW AND FACT HAS LITTLE BEARING ON LEGISLATIVE INTENT; BLOCKBURGER ANALYSIS SHOULD NO LONGER BE REQUIRED IN CASES WHERE MULTIPLE PUNISHMENTS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED IN A SINGLE PROSECUTION UNLESS ONE COUNT IS ARGUABLY INCLUDED WITHIN THE OTHER.
	Go To Brief     Court of Appeals Decision     Supreme Court Decision
Prostitution/Pandering
(No Entries)
Sexual Conduct
(No Entries)
Other
State v. John T. Trochinski, Jr., 00-2545-CR
II.	THE STATUTE PROHIBITING EXPOSING A MINOR TO HARMFUL MATERIAL IS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY OVERBROAD ON ITS FACE BECAUSE IT IMPOSES STRICT LIABILITY FOR CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED EXPRESSION.
	Go To Brief              Go To Decision