Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 800.08 (2026)
Procedure at trial
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
800.08(1)(1) At trial the plaintiff shall provide a prosecutor who is an attorney authorized or licensed to practice law in this state. The plaintiff shall first offer evidence in support of the citation or complaint. The defendant may offer evidence after the plaintiff has rested. If the plaintiff and the defendant have offered evidence upon the citation or complaint, the parties may then respectively offer rebuttal testimony only, unless the court permits them to offer evidence upon their original case. Both parties shall have the opportunity to question all witnesses.
800.08(2)(a)(a) Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare that he or she will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken his or her conscience and impress the witness with the duty to testify truthfully.
800.08(2)(b)(b) The oath may be administered by the judge or his or her designee substantially in the following form: Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you shall give in this matter shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God.
800.08(2)(c)(c) Every person who declares that he or she has conscientious scruples against taking the oath, or swearing in the usual form, shall make a solemn declaration or affirmation, which may be in the following form: Do you solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the testimony you shall give in this matter shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; and this you do under the pains and penalties of perjury.
800.08(2)(d)(d) The assent to the oath or affirmation by the person making it may be manifested by the uplifted hand.
800.08(3)(3) The standard of proof for conviction of any person charged with violation of any municipal ordinance shall be evidence that is clear, is satisfactory, and convinces the judge to a reasonable certainty.
800.08(4)(4) Except as provided in s. 938.17 (2) (h) 3., the court shall be bound by the rules of evidence specified in chs. 901 to 911.
800.08(5)(5) If a defendant does not appear at trial, the court may enter a default judgment under s. 800.09.
800.08 HistoryHistory: 1977 c. 305; 1979 c. 32 ss. 68, 92 (17); Stats. 1979 s. 800.08; 1997 a. 205; 2009 a. 402; 2013 a. 107.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1995–2020 · leading case: State v. Christopher John Kerr, 913 N.W.2d 787 (Wis. 2018).
State v. Christopher John Kerr, 913 N.W.2d 787 (Wis. 2018). “Entry of default judgment in civil forfeiture cases is governed by Wis. Stat. §§ 800.08 and 800.09. Section 800.”
State v. Verhagen, 2013 WI App 16 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013). “See Wis. Stat. § 800.08 (3). ¶ 27. We believe the appellants read too much into Apprendi .”
City of Pewaukee v. Carter, 2003 WI App 260 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “" The City asserts that the circuit court's application of Meyer essentially requires the defendant to present a defense, a requirement not mandated under Wis. Stat. § 800.08 (1). 2 The City thus reduces the circuit court's decision to one based on its improper determination…”
Fond Du Lac Cnty. v. Mentzel, 536 N.W.2d 160 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “See § 800.08(3), Stats. If Fond du Lac had a municipal court, which it does not, there is a distinct possibility that this action would have been brought in the municipal court rather than the trial court.”
City of Pewaukee v. Carter, 2004 WI 136 (Wis. 2004). “34 Wis. Stat. § 800.08 (1) ("The municipality shall first offer evidence .”
City of Milwaukee v. Hampton, 553 N.W.2d 855 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). “01 governs proceedings in municipal courts in Wisconsin, see § 800.08(4), Stats. ("Municipal courts shall be bound by the rules of evidence specified in chs.”
City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 579 N.W.2d 753 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998). “Municipalities bear the burden of presenting clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence that a defendant has violated a municipal ordinance, while defendants may, but need not, testify or offer any evidence after *281 the municipality has rested.”
Waukesha Mun. Court v. Isaac Gichuru Kinuthia (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 800.08(3). We disagree. Hendriksen’s testimony left little doubt that Kinuthia, and not the mysterious other blue vehicle, was the speeder.”
— Wis. Stat. § 800.08(1) — 2 cases
City of Pewaukee v. Carter, 2003 WI App 260 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “" The City asserts that the circuit court's application of Meyer essentially requires the defendant to present a defense, a requirement not mandated under Wis. Stat. § 800.08 (1). 2 The City thus reduces the circuit court's decision to one based on its improper determination…”
City of Sun Prairie v. Davis, 579 N.W.2d 753 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998). “Municipalities bear the burden of presenting clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence that a defendant has violated a municipal ordinance, while defendants may, but need not, testify or offer any evidence after *281 the municipality has rested.”
— Wis. Stat. § 800.08(3) — 2 cases
Fond Du Lac Cnty. v. Mentzel, 536 N.W.2d 160 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “See § 800.08(3), Stats. If Fond du Lac had a municipal court, which it does not, there is a distinct possibility that this action would have been brought in the municipal court rather than the trial court.”
Waukesha Mun. Court v. Isaac Gichuru Kinuthia (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “§ 800.08(3). We disagree. Hendriksen’s testimony left little doubt that Kinuthia, and not the mysterious other blue vehicle, was the speeder.”
— Wis. Stat. § 800.08(4) — 1 case
City of Milwaukee v. Hampton, 553 N.W.2d 855 (Wis. Ct. App. 1996). “01 governs proceedings in municipal courts in Wisconsin, see § 800.08(4), Stats. ("Municipal courts shall be bound by the rules of evidence specified in chs.”
— Wis. Stat. § 800.08(5) — 1 case
State v. Christopher John Kerr, 913 N.W.2d 787 (Wis. 2018). “Entry of default judgment in civil forfeiture cases is governed by Wis. Stat. §§ 800.08 and 800.09. Section 800.”
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.