751.06751.06Discretionary reversal.In an appeal in the supreme court, if it appears from the record that the real controversy has not been fully tried, or that it is probable that justice has for any reason miscarried, the court may reverse the judgment or order appealed from, regardless of whether the proper motion or objection appears in the record, and may direct the entry of the proper judgment or remit the case to the trial court for the entry of the proper judgment or for a new trial, and direct the making of such amendments in the pleadings and the adoption of such procedure in that court, not inconsistent with statutes or rules, as are necessary to accomplish the ends of justice.
751.06 HistoryHistory: 1977 c. 187 s. 76; Stats. 1977 s. 751.06.
751.06 AnnotationThe court may reverse in the interest of justice even though proper motions or objections were not made. A judgment was reversed because the defendant’s counsel persisted in asking questions that amounted to testimony on his part and because in arguing to the jury he commented on facts that he had observed. Lorenz v. Wolff, 45 Wis. 2d 407, 173 N.W.2d 129 (1970).
751.06 AnnotationA general judgment creditor, having failed to timely appeal from a foreclosure judgment, was not entitled under this section to remand for a factual determination of a real, although perhaps untried, issue affecting the homestead exemption. Anchor Savings & Loan Association v. Week, 62 Wis. 2d 169, 213 N.W.2d 737 (1974).
751.06 AnnotationA new trial was necessary because of the prosecution’s failure to make full and fair pretrial disclosure to the defendant of exculpatory evidence. State v. Stanislawski, 62 Wis. 2d 730, 216 N.W.2d 8 (1974).
751.06 AnnotationRequirements for a new trial upon the ground of newly discovered evidence are discussed. State v. Boyce, 75 Wis. 2d 452, 249 N.W.2d 758 (1977).
751.06 AnnotationWhen a verdict form did not contain a special fact question regarding a major issue of the case, the real issues had not been tried. Schulz v. St. Mary’s Hospital, 81 Wis. 2d 638, 260 N.W.2d 783 (1978).
751.06 AnnotationAlthough failure to object at a conference under s. 805.13 to a substantive defect in the verdict constituted waiver, the failure to object did not preclude the court’s consideration of the defect under s. 751.06. Clark v. Leisure Vehicles, Inc., 96 Wis. 2d 607, 292 N.W.2d 630 (1980). See also Air Wisconsin, Inc. v. North Central Airlines, Inc., 98 Wis. 2d 301, 296 N.W.2d 749 (1980).
751.06 AnnotationWhen the credibility of a witness was a critical issue, exclusion under s. 906.08 (1) of the evidence offered was grounds for discretionary reversal. State v. Cuyler, 110 Wis. 2d 133, 327 N.W.2d 662 (1983).
751.06 AnnotationUnder the second prong of the discretionary-reversal statute, the “miscarriage of justice” prong, a court would have to conclude that there would be a substantial probability that a different result would be likely on retrial in order to grant a discretionary reversal. State v. Schumacher, 144 Wis. 2d 388, 424 N.W.2d 672 (1988).
751.06 AnnotationA new trial may be ordered in either of two ways: 1) whenever the real controversy has not been fully tried; or 2) whenever it is probable that justice has for any reason miscarried. Separate criteria exists for determining each of these two distinct situations. Situations in which the controversy may not have been fully tried have arisen in two factually distinct ways: 1) when the jury was erroneously not given the opportunity to hear important testimony that bore on an important issue of the case; and 2) when the jury had before it evidence not properly admitted which so clouded a crucial issue that it may be fairly said that the real controversy was not fully tried. State v. Hicks, 202 Wis. 2d 150, 549 N.W.2d 435 (1996), 94-2256.
751.06 AnnotationState v. Wyss: A new appellate standard for granting new trials in the interest of justice. 1987 WLR 171.
751.06 AnnotationA Fearless Search for the Truth No Longer: State v. Henley and Its Destructive Impact on New Trials in the Interest of Justice. Mark. 2012 WLR 1367.
State v. Emmanuel Earl Trammell (2019) wis · cites it 51דLastly, Trammell alternatively claims that discretionary reversal is warranted under Wis. Stat. § 751.06 . ¶2 We conclude that Trammell waived his right to object to the use of Wis JI—Criminal 140 by failing to object to its use at the jury instruction and verdict conference,…”
Braylon Seifert v. Kay M. Balink, M.D. (2017) wis · cites it 26דShould this court grant a new trial in the interests of justice pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 751.06 ? ¶14 The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the circuit court, concluding that a new trial was not warranted.”
Village of Trempealeau v. Mikrut (2004) wis · cites it 20דIn addition, Wis. Stat. §§ 751.06 and 752.35 may allow discretionary appellate review of waived issues in extraordinary circumstances, and Wis.”
State v. Avery (2013) wis · cites it 22ד" Wis. Stat. § 751.06 . Cases where the real controversy has not been fully tried have generally been limited to two situations: (1) when the jury was erroneously denied the opportunity to hear important evidence bearing on an important issue in the case or (2) when the jury had…”
Winnebago Cnty. v. J.M. (In Re Mental Commitment of J.M.) (2018) wis · cites it 30דhas not established that he is entitled to a new trial under Wis. Stat. § 751.06 on the ground that his wearing of prison garb during the trial so distracted the jury "that the real controversy [was] not [] fully tried," and justice was miscarried.”
Vollmer v. Luety (1990) wis · cites it 17דSec. 751.06, Stats. (discretionary reversal power of supreme court), and 752.”
State v. Corey R. Kucharski (2015) wis · cites it 21דawb ¶54 The statute has subsequently gone through slight revisions and has been renumbered as Wis. Stat. § 751.06 . The substance, however, is substantially the same: In an appeal in the supreme court, if it appears from the record that the real controversy has not been fully…”
State v. Mayo (2007) wis · cites it 11דMayo further asserts that he is entitled to a new trial in the interest of justice under Wis. Stat. § 751.06 (2005-06). Mayo argues that defense counsel's failure to object to the prosecutor's comments in her opening statement, and in her closing and rebuttal arguments,…”
State v. Dale R. Neumann (2013) wis · cites it 15ד2011AP1044-CR & 2011AP1105-CR III ¶87 The parents assert that their convictions should be reversed and new trials should be ordered in the interest of justice under Wis. Stat. § 751.06 . They maintain that the real controversy was not fully tried because of erroneous jury…”
State v. Bannister (2007) wis · cites it 22דSecond, should the court grant Bannister a new trial in the interest of justice pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 751.06 ? [2] We hold that the real controversy in this case was tried and do not grant Bannister a new trial.”
State v. Romero (1988) wis · cites it 22דother incidents of sexual assault? Second, was it plain error for the circuit court to admit testimony by the police officer and a social worker that the complainant was truthful in her accusations? Although the parties have requested that we address these issues under the plain…”
State v. Hicks (1996) wis · cites it 16דSee Wis. Stat. § 751.06 . [1] Our examination of *153 the record leads us to conclude that the real controversy was not fully tried inasmuch as: (1) the DNA evidence excluding Hicks as the donor of one of the hair specimens was relevant to the critical issue of identification;…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
