close defense in Wisconsin

2023The court concluded that upon the basis of State v. Beyer, 2021 WI 59 , 397 Wis. 2d 616 , 960 N.W.2d 408 , a recent case in which: [T]he Wisconsin Supreme Court considered whether or not the guilty plea waiver rule applies when a defendant pleads not guilty to an offense, but, then, stipulates to the inculpatory facts supporting each element of the offense and explicitly asks the Court to make a finding as to guilt or innocence at the close of the hearing where no witness has testified.

2023The court concluded that upon the basis of State v. Beyer, 2021 WI 59 , 397 Wis. 2d 616 , 960 N.W.2d 408 , a recent case in which: [T]he Wisconsin Supreme Court considered whether or not the guilty plea waiver rule applies when a defendant pleads not guilty to an offense, but, then, stipulates to the inculpatory facts supporting each element of the offense and explicitly asks the Court to make a finding as to guilt or innocence at the close of the hearing where no witness has testified.

2023“When a court or other judicial body acts in excess of its jurisdiction, its orders or judgments are void.” Kohler Co. v. DILHR, 81 Wis. 2d 11, 25 , 259 N.W.2d 695 (1977).

2023“When a court or other judicial body acts in excess of its jurisdiction, its orders or judgments are void.” Kohler Co. v. DILHR, 81 Wis. 2d 11, 25 , 259 N.W.2d 695 (1977).

2023State v. Schroeder, 224 Wis. 2d 706, 711 , 593 N.W.2d 76 (Ct. App. 1999). 3 Nos. 2021AP153 2021AP154 ¶6 Here, the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review Close’s motion to withdraw his plea in case No. 2004CF127 because Close had already been discharged from DOC custody on the sentence imposed in that case before Close filed the motion.

2023State v. Schroeder, 224 Wis. 2d 706, 711 , 593 N.W.2d 76 (Ct. App. 1999). 3 Nos. 2021AP153 2021AP154 ¶6 Here, the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review Close’s motion to withdraw his plea in case No. 2004CF127 because Close had already been discharged from DOC custody on the sentence imposed in that case before Close filed the motion.

2021Id. ¶25 The wife’s attorney subsequently filed a proposed judgment that allowed the husband to subtract $5,442 from the amount he had agreed to pay the wife, in order to account for money in accounts that were titled solely in the wife’s name.

2003The Court in Brooke Group clearly stated that "[d]etermining whether recoupment of predatory losses is likely requires an estimate of the cost of the alleged predation and a close analysis of both the scheme alleged by the plaintiff and the structure and conditions of the relevant market." Brooke Group, 509 U.S. at 226 .

1994As we noted in Wilson: "[I]t would be advisable for the trial court, immediately prior to the close of the defense's case, to make a record inquiry as to whether the defendant understands he has a right to testify and that it is his personal decision, after consultation with counsel, not to take the stand." Id. at 672 n.3, 508 N.W.2d at 48 n.3 (quoting Torres-Arboledo v. State, 524 So. 2d 403 , 411 n.2 (Fla. 1988)).

1994As we noted in Wilson : "[I]t would be advisable for the trial court, immediately prior to the close of the defense's case, to make a record inquiry as to whether the defendant understands he has a right to testify and that it is his personal decision, after consultation with counsel, not to take the stand." Id. at 672 n.3, 508 N.W.2d at 48 n.3 (quoting Torres-Arboledo v. State, 524 So. 2d 403 , 411 n.2 (Fla. 1988)).

1994Nonetheless, as we explained in Wilson , the principles of waiver set forth in State v. Albright, 96 Wis. 2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (1980), remain precedential law and, therefore, we are not in a position to mandate a new requirement concerning waiver of one's right to testify.

1994Nonetheless, as we explained in Wilson , the principles of waiver set forth in State v. Albright, 96 Wis. 2d 122 , 291 N.W.2d 487 (1980), remain precedential law and, therefore, we are not in a position to mandate a new requirement concerning waiver of one's right to testify.

1993Id. [3] Wilson asks that we adopt a procedure requiring the trial court to undertake an on-the-record colloquy with the defendant at the close of the defense's case-in-chief concerning his or her right to testify.

1987Defendants assert that, in ruling on the State's motion, the trial court "neither held an evidentiary hearing nor made findings of fact," but instead treated the Defendants' brief as an "offer of proof." Defendants contend that the trial court should have taken evidence bearing on the free speech defense since their claim of free speech protection "turns completely upon the particular facts of this case." The resolution of the constitutional question raised in this case, Defendants argue, requires "a close analysis of the legally significant facts, or what are sometimes called `constitutional

1987Defendants assert that, in ruling on the State's motion, the trial court "neither held an evidentiary hearing nor made findings of fact," but instead treated the Defendants' brief as an "offer of proof." Defendants contend that the trial court should have taken evidence bearing on the free speech defense since their claim of free speech protection "turns completely upon the particular facts of this case." The resolution of the constitutional question raised in this case, Defendants argue, requires "a close analysis of the legally significant facts, or what are sometimes called `constitutional

1978By the Court. — Judgment reversed and cause remanded with directions to enter a judgment affirming the PSC order of June 2, 1977. 1 This amendment of the statute was enacted by the legislature within three months after the supreme court decision in State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., 254 Wis. 327 , 35 N.W.2d 918 (1949). 2 See State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., Id., wherein the hearing examiner established a schedule at the close of the hearing for the submission of briefs on the transcript. 3 Brunette v. Bierke, 271 Wis. 190, 196 , 72 N.W.2d 702 (1955).

1978By the Court. — Judgment reversed and cause remanded with directions to enter a judgment affirming the PSC order of June 2, 1977. 1 This amendment of the statute was enacted by the legislature within three months after the supreme court decision in State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., 254 Wis. 327 , 35 N.W.2d 918 (1949). 2 See State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., Id., wherein the hearing examiner established a schedule at the close of the hearing for the submission of briefs on the transcript. 3 Brunette v. Bierke, 271 Wis. 190, 196 , 72 N.W.2d 702 (1955).

1978By the Court. — Judgment reversed and cause remanded with directions to enter a judgment affirming the PSC order of June 2, 1977. 1 This amendment of the statute was enacted by the legislature within three months after the supreme court decision in State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., 254 Wis. 327 , 35 N.W.2d 918 (1949). 2 See State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., Id., wherein the hearing examiner established a schedule at the close of the hearing for the submission of briefs on the transcript. 3 Brunette v. Bierke, 271 Wis. 190, 196 , 72 N.W.2d 702 (1955).

1978By the Court. — Judgment reversed and cause remanded with directions to enter a judgment affirming the PSC order of June 2, 1977. 1 This amendment of the statute was enacted by the legislature within three months after the supreme court decision in State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., 254 Wis. 327 , 35 N.W.2d 918 (1949). 2 See State v. Cardinal Lines, Inc., Id., wherein the hearing examiner established a schedule at the close of the hearing for the submission of briefs on the transcript. 3 Brunette v. Bierke, 271 Wis. 190, 196 , 72 N.W.2d 702 (1955).

1928In In re Janitor of Supreme Court, 35 Wis. 410 , the court emphatically denied that the superintendent of public property had the right to discharge a janitor of this court.

1906If they are intended to vest in the court authority to pass upon the wisdom and policy of the creation of a new town after all of the facts specified in the statute have been found to exist, then the legislation clearly falls within the criticism made in In re North Milwaukee, 93 Wis. 616 , 67 N. W. 1033 , upon the statute there considered.

1906If they are intended to vest in the court authority to pass upon the wisdom and policy of the creation of a new town after all of the facts specified in the statute have been found to exist, then the legislation clearly falls within the criticism made in In re North Milwaukee, 93 Wis. 616 , 67 N. W. 1033 , upon the statute there considered.