Cases pin-citing Erickson · Go Syfert
Search » Famous passages » Cases pin-citing Erickson

Cases pin-citing Erickson

State v. Erickson  ·  1999  ·  42 pinpoint citations from 22 cases, 11 distinct passages.

State v. P. M. V.  ·  2026-05-27  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Ryan Lewis Steinhoff  ·  2026-05-27  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and … appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
Joshua D. Leach v. Brian Hayes  ·  2025-01-22  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and … appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Kenneth W. Hill  ·  2024-08-06  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and … appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Todd Allen Kendhammer  ·  2024-06-06  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  pin 596 N.W.2d at 749
“trial counsel was not ineffective for failing or refusing to pursue feckless arguments”
State v. William Scott Latta  ·  2024-02-15  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he normal procedure in criminal cases is to address [a forfeited issue] within the rubric of the ineffective assistance of counsel.”
State v. Cullen Joel Horne  ·  2023-03-21  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
Thomas A. Akers v. Cheryl R. Akers  ·  2022-09-27  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
Outagamie County v. R. G. K.  ·  2022-09-20  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Marquise L. Stewart  ·  2022-08-09  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and … appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Justin M. Church  ·  2022-06-01  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Ryan L. Bessert  ·  2022-05-03  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Hajji Y. McReynolds  ·  2022-04-12  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. Cornelius D. Carolina  ·  2022-03-22  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“[T]he [forfeiture] rule is one of judicial administration and ... appellate courts have authority to ignore the [forfeiture].”
State v. David Gutierrez  ·  2020-06-03  ·  Wisconsin Supreme Court  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
"[W]e expect a circuit court to use voir dire to explore a prospective juror's fears, biases, and predilections and fully expect a juror's honest answers at times to be less than unequivocal."
State v. Lucious Emmit Mason  ·  2019-12-27  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
“To be sure, there are instances where a court will presume prejudice; those instances, however, are rare.”
Antonio Elton Hubbard v. Commonwealth of Virginia  ·  2017-08-01  ·  Court of Appeals of Virginia  ·  pin 596 N.W.2d at 749
“A defendant is entitled to fair and impartial jurors, not jurors whom he hopes will be favorable towards his position. A defendant’s rights go to those who serve, not to those who are excused.”
State v. Jeffrey P. Lepsch  ·  2017-03-31  ·  Wisconsin Supreme Court  ·  4 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
"more than rank speculation" is needed "to satisfy the prejudice prong"
Tina B. v. Richard H.  ·  2014-11-13  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
"The waiver rule exists to cultivate timely objections. Such objections promote both efficiency and fairness."
State v. Harris  ·  2012-06-06  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  2 pin-cites  ·  pin 227 N.W.2d at 749
"[T]he normal procedure in criminal cases is to address waiver within the rubric of the ineffective assistance of counsel."
Leflore v. Pollard  ·  2008-10-07  ·  Seventh Circuit  ·  pin 227 Wis. 2d at 758
“[A] prospective juror need not respond to voir dire questions with unequivocal declarations of impartiality.”
State v. Harris  ·  1999-08-10  ·  Court of Appeals of Wisconsin  ·  pin 227 Wis. 2d at 758
"courts have presumed prejudice when a defendant was denied counsel altogether at critical stages of the adjudicative process"