Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (2026)
Engaging in repeated acts of sexual assault of the same child
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
948.025(1)(1) Whoever commits 3 or more violations under s. 948.02 (1) or (2) within a specified period of time involving the same child is guilty of:
948.025(1)(a)(a) A Class A felony if at least 3 of the violations were violations of s. 948.02 (1) (am).
948.025(1)(b)(b) A Class B felony if at least 3 of the violations were violations of s. 948.02 (1) (am), (b), or (c).
948.025(1)(c)(c) A Class B felony if at least 3 of the violations were violations of s. 948.02 (1) (am), (b), (c), or (d).
948.025(1)(e)(e) A Class C felony if at least 3 of the violations were violations of s. 948.02 (1) or (2).
948.025(2)(a)(a) If an action under sub. (1) (a) is tried to a jury, in order to find the defendant guilty the members of the jury must unanimously agree that at least 3 violations of s. 948.02 (1) (am) occurred within the specified period of time but need not agree on which acts constitute the requisite number.
948.025(2)(b)(b) If an action under sub. (1) (b) is tried to a jury, in order to find the defendant guilty the members of the jury must unanimously agree that at least 3 violations of s. 948.02 (1) (am), (b), or (c) occurred within the specified period of time but need not agree on which acts constitute the requisite number and need not agree on whether a particular violation was a violation of s. 948.02 (1) (am), (b), or (c).
948.025(2)(c)(c) If an action under sub. (1) (c) is tried to a jury, in order to find the defendant guilty the members of the jury must unanimously agree that at least 3 violations of s. 948.02 (1) (am), (b), (c), or (d) occurred within the specified period of time but need not agree on which acts constitute the requisite number and need not agree on whether a particular violation was a violation of s. 948.02 (1) (am), (b), (c), or (d).
948.025(2)(d)(d) If an action under sub. (1) (d) is tried to a jury, in order to find the defendant guilty the members of the jury must unanimously agree that at least 3 violations of s. 948.02 (1) occurred within the specified period of time but need not agree on which acts constitute the requisite number.
948.025(2)(e)(e) If an action under sub. (1) (e) is tried to a jury, in order to find the defendant guilty the members of the jury must unanimously agree that at least 3 violations of s. 948.02 (1) or (2) occurred within the specified period of time but need not agree on which acts constitute the requisite number and need not agree on whether a particular violation was a violation of s. 948.02 (1) or (2).
948.025(3)(3) The state may not charge in the same action a defendant with a violation of this section and with a violation involving the same child under s. 948.02 or 948.10, unless the other violation occurred outside of the time period applicable under sub. (1). This subsection does not prohibit a conviction for an included crime under s. 939.66 when the defendant is charged with a violation of this section.
948.025 AnnotationThis section does not violate the right to a unanimous verdict or to due process. State v. Johnson, 2001 WI 52, 243 Wis. 2d 365, 627 N.W.2d 455, 99-2968.
948.025 AnnotationConvicting the defendant on three counts of first-degree sexual assault of a child and one count of repeated acts of sexual assault of a child when all four charges involved the same child and the same time period violated sub. (3). A court may reverse the conviction on the repeated acts charge under sub. (1) rather than the convictions for specific acts of sexual assault under s. 948.02 (1) when the proscription against multiple charges in sub. (3) is violated even if the repeated acts charge was filed prior to the charges for the specific actions. State v. Cooper, 2003 WI App 227, 267 Wis. 2d 886, 672 N.W.2d 118, 02-2247.
948.025 AnnotationThe state may bring multiple prosecutions under sub. (1) when two or more episodes involving “3 or more violations under s. 948.02 (1) or (2) within a specified period of time involving the same child” are discrete as to time and venue. State v. Nommensen, 2007 WI App 224, 305 Wis. 2d 695, 741 N.W.2d 481, 06-2727.
948.025 AnnotationThe respondent 15 year-old’s assertion, that applying sub. (1) (e) to him violated his due process and equal protection rights, failed. While a juvenile under the age of 16 could be both a victim and an offender under sub. (1) (e), the respondent was not a victim under the facts in this case. Sub. (1) (e) prohibits a person from engaging in sexual contact with another person who has not reached the age of 16. Sexual contact occurs when intentional touching is done “either for the purpose of sexually degrading or sexually humiliating the complainant or sexually arousing or gratifying the defendant.” The statute provides an objective standard that makes clear that every person who engages in sexual contact with a child under the age of 16 for the purposes described is strictly liable. State v. Colton M., 2015 WI App 94, 366 Wis. 2d 119, 875 N.W.2d 642, 14-2419.
948.025 AnnotationWhen the state alleged that the defendant engaged in repeated sexual assaults of the same child during 2007 and 2008, and during that time period sub. (1) was repealed and recreated, the applicable law was the statute in effect when the last criminal action constituting a continuing offense occurred. Although the defendant should have been charged under the 2007-08 law, the defendant was mistakenly charged under the 2005-06 law. Nevertheless, the defendant was charged with a crime that existed at law. Class C criminal liability attached under the 2005-06 and 2007-08 laws to the same conduct as it pertained to the defendant. The wording difference was immaterial as the elements were the same. The technical charging error did not prejudice the defendant, nor did it affect the circuit court’s subject matter jurisdiction. State v. Scott, 2017 WI App 40, 376 Wis. 2d 430, 899 N.W.2d 728, 16-1411.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 112
cases (38 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case: State v. Johnson, 2001 WI 52 (Wis. 2001).
State v. Johnson, 2001 WI 52 (Wis. 2001). “This case presents a constitutional challenge to the statute making it a crime to engage in repeated acts of sexual assault of the same child, Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1997-98). [1] The defendant challenges the provision in the statute that relieves the jury of any requirement of…”
State v. Joel M. Hurley, 2015 WI 35 (Wis. 2015). “In a prosecution under Wis. Stat. § 948.025 , due weight must be given to the impact of the repeated nature of the sexual 21 No.”
State v. Shaun M. Sanders, 912 N.W.2d 16 (Wis. 2018). “¶10 The district attorney charged Sanders with four counts of criminal misconduct: (1) repeated sexual assault of a child contrary to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1)(a)9 for conduct occurring between September 26, 2003, and June 5, 2006; (2) repeated sexual assault of a child contrary…”
State v. Molitor, 565 N.W.2d 248 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “*420 Just because we conclude that Molitor's attack on § 948.025, Stats., is properly before us, however, does not mean that we find merit in it.”
State v. Scott, 2017 WI App 40 (Wis. Ct. App. 2017). “We disagree but modify the judgment to reflect that Scott pleaded guilty to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (l)(e) (2007-08). *436 Factual and Procedural Background ¶ 2.”
State v. Nommensen, 2007 WI App 224 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007). “In March 2004, the State filed a criminal complaint in Washington county charging Nommensen with the repeated sexual assault of his daughter pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1) (2005-06). 2 The complaint alleged that the assaults occurred between May 1994 and April 1998 in the…”
State v. Rory A. McKellips, 2016 WI 51 (Wis. 2016). “In addition, the jury acquitted McKellips of repeated sexual assault of a child and exposing genitals or pubic area, contrary to Wis. Stat. §§ 948.025 (1)(e), 939.50(3)(c), 948.”
State v. Ringer, 2010 WI 69 (Wis. 2010). “Ringer (Ringer) was charged with repeated sexual assault of a child in violation of Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1)(ar) (2005-06). [2] The circuit court granted Ringer's motion in limine, allowing him to introduce at trial evidence that the child complainant made prior allegedly…”
State v. Radke, 2003 WI 7 (Wis. 2003). “Radke, the defendant, was convicted of repeated acts of sexual assault of the same child, in violation of Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1) (1997-1998), 1 and was also convicted of being a persistent repeater under Wis.”
State v. Cooper, 2003 WI App 227 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “, contrary to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1) (2001-02). 2 Count one covered events that occurred between January 1 and October 14, 1997, and count two covered events that occurred between October 1, 1998, and January 25, 1999.”
State v. Domke, 2011 WI 95 (Wis. 2011). “On December 18, 2006, Domke was charged with the repeated sexual assault of a child in violation of Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (l)(a) (2003-04) 3 based on four alleged incidents of sexual contact with Alicia S.”
State v. Hunt, 2003 WI 81 (Wis. 2003). “02 (1)), one count of repeated sexual assault of the same child ( Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1)), one count of first-degree sexual assault resulting in the pregnancy of a child ( Wis.”
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(1) — 20 cases
State v. Joel M. Hurley, 2015 WI 35 (Wis. 2015). “In a prosecution under Wis. Stat. § 948.025 , due weight must be given to the impact of the repeated nature of the sexual 21 No.”
State v. Johnson, 2001 WI 52 (Wis. 2001). “This case presents a constitutional challenge to the statute making it a crime to engage in repeated acts of sexual assault of the same child, Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1997-98). [1] The defendant challenges the provision in the statute that relieves the jury of any requirement of…”
State v. Molitor, 565 N.W.2d 248 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “*420 Just because we conclude that Molitor's attack on § 948.025, Stats., is properly before us, however, does not mean that we find merit in it.”
State v. Radke, 2003 WI 7 (Wis. 2003). “Radke, the defendant, was convicted of repeated acts of sexual assault of the same child, in violation of Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1) (1997-1998), 1 and was also convicted of being a persistent repeater under Wis.”
State v. McGowan, 2006 WI App 80 (Wis. Ct. App. 2006).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(1)(a) — 1 case
State v. Mister M. S. Gibson (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(1)(b) — 8 cases
State v. Herrera-Ortiz, 932 N.W.2d 180 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Clifford Lee Kelsey (Wis. Ct. App. 2025).
State v. Michael L. Brantner (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Jedadiah Jordan Doyle (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
Wilson v. Boughton (E.D. Wis. 2019).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(1)(d) — 10 cases
State v. Jeninga, 925 N.W.2d 574 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Robert E. Poch, Jr. (Wis. Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Peter Lawrence Handley (Wis. Ct. App. 2025).
State v. Reed, 921 N.W.2d 520 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018).
State v. Richard A. Boie (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(1)(e) — 13 cases
State v. Shaun M. Sanders, 912 N.W.2d 16 (Wis. 2018). “¶10 The district attorney charged Sanders with four counts of criminal misconduct: (1) repeated sexual assault of a child contrary to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1)(a)9 for conduct occurring between September 26, 2003, and June 5, 2006; (2) repeated sexual assault of a child contrary…”
State v. Alexander M. Schultz, 2020 WI 24 (Wis. 2020).
State v. Alexander M. Schultz, 2020 WI 24 (Wis. 2020).
State v. Herrera-Ortiz, 932 N.W.2d 180 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Zachary T. Hogenson (Wis. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(2) — 3 cases
State v. Johnson, 2001 WI 52 (Wis. 2001). “This case presents a constitutional challenge to the statute making it a crime to engage in repeated acts of sexual assault of the same child, Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1997-98). [1] The defendant challenges the provision in the statute that relieves the jury of any requirement of…”
State v. Molitor, 565 N.W.2d 248 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997). “*420 Just because we conclude that Molitor's attack on § 948.025, Stats., is properly before us, however, does not mean that we find merit in it.”
S. S. v. A. S.-p. (Wis. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(2m) — 1 case
State v. Jipson, 2003 WI App 222 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(3) — 8 cases
State v. Cooper, 2003 WI App 227 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “, contrary to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (1) (2001-02). 2 Count one covered events that occurred between January 1 and October 14, 1997, and count two covered events that occurred between October 1, 1998, and January 25, 1999.”
State v. Torkelson, 2007 WI App 272 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Moffett, 2000 WI 130 (Wis. 2000).
State v. Alexander M. Schultz, 2020 WI 24 (Wis. 2020).
State v. Sulayman M. Manneh (Wis. Ct. App. 2020).
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(l)(a) — 1 case
State v. Domke, 2011 WI 95 (Wis. 2011). “On December 18, 2006, Domke was charged with the repeated sexual assault of a child in violation of Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (l)(a) (2003-04) 3 based on four alleged incidents of sexual contact with Alicia S.”
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(l)(b) — 1 case
State v. Scott, 2017 WI App 40 (Wis. Ct. App. 2017). “We disagree but modify the judgment to reflect that Scott pleaded guilty to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (l)(e) (2007-08). *436 Factual and Procedural Background ¶ 2.”
— Wis. Stat. § 948.025(l)(e) — 2 cases
State v. Colton M., 2015 WI App 94 (Wis. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Scott, 2017 WI App 40 (Wis. Ct. App. 2017). “We disagree but modify the judgment to reflect that Scott pleaded guilty to Wis. Stat. § 948.025 (l)(e) (2007-08). *436 Factual and Procedural Background ¶ 2.”
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.