Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 972.12 (2026)
Sequestration of jurors
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
972.12972.12 Sequestration of jurors. The court may direct that the jurors sworn be kept together or be permitted to separate. The court may appoint an officer of the court to keep the jurors together and to prevent communication between the jurors and others.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1985–2019 · leading case: State v. Raymond L. Nieves, 2017 WI 69 (Wis. 2017).
State v. Raymond L. Nieves, 2017 WI 69 (Wis. 2017). “Wis. Stat. § 972.12 (3) (emphasis added).”
State v. Bangert, 389 N.W.2d 12 (Wis. 1986). “See, sec. 972.12, Stats. The defendant would not have or could not have conceived of any potential prejudice due to the trial court's change of its order, because none even arguably existed.”
State v. Wilson, 440 N.W.2d 534 (Wis. 1989). “In regard to the defendant's claim that the jury should have been sequestered, we note that the circuit court, pursuant to sec. 972.12(1), Stats., has discretion in the matter of sequestration at trial, and we hold, on the basis of the record before us, that the circuit court…”
State v. Halmo, 371 N.W.2d 424 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985). “2 Whereas sec. 972.12(1), Stats., allows the trial court, in its discretion, to allow separation of the jury after it is sworn but before submission of the case, sec.”
State v. Wideman, 556 N.W.2d 737 (Wis. 1996). “12(1); (2) public policy does not support any *100 lesser proof requirements for OWI repeaters compared to repeaters under § 972.12(1); and (3) application of § 973.”
State v. Burks, 2004 WI App 14 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “03 (peremptory challenges); see also Wis. Stat. § 972.12 (juror sequestration).”
State v. Edelburg, 384 N.W.2d 724 (Wis. 1986). “Edelburg argues that the trial court erred by refusing to allow him to testify regarding the possible bias of a witness, giving a coercive supplemental jury instruction, and violating sec. 972.12(2), Stats., by allowing the jury to separate during deliberations.”
State v. Chisem, 927 N.W.2d 920 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019). “§ 972.12(3) had been violated by the admission of nontestimonial hearsay statements, the error was harmless due to the "overwhelming evidence" against Nieves.”
— Wis. Stat. § 972.12(1) — 3 cases
State v. Wilson, 440 N.W.2d 534 (Wis. 1989). “In regard to the defendant's claim that the jury should have been sequestered, we note that the circuit court, pursuant to sec. 972.12(1), Stats., has discretion in the matter of sequestration at trial, and we hold, on the basis of the record before us, that the circuit court…”
State v. Wideman, 556 N.W.2d 737 (Wis. 1996). “12(1); (2) public policy does not support any *100 lesser proof requirements for OWI repeaters compared to repeaters under § 972.12(1); and (3) application of § 973.”
State v. Halmo, 371 N.W.2d 424 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985). “2 Whereas sec. 972.12(1), Stats., allows the trial court, in its discretion, to allow separation of the jury after it is sworn but before submission of the case, sec.”
— Wis. Stat. § 972.12(2) — 2 cases
State v. Halmo, 371 N.W.2d 424 (Wis. Ct. App. 1985). “2 Whereas sec. 972.12(1), Stats., allows the trial court, in its discretion, to allow separation of the jury after it is sworn but before submission of the case, sec.”
State v. Edelburg, 384 N.W.2d 724 (Wis. 1986). “Edelburg argues that the trial court erred by refusing to allow him to testify regarding the possible bias of a witness, giving a coercive supplemental jury instruction, and violating sec. 972.12(2), Stats., by allowing the jury to separate during deliberations.”
— Wis. Stat. § 972.12(3) — 1 case
State v. Chisem, 927 N.W.2d 920 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019). “§ 972.12(3) had been violated by the admission of nontestimonial hearsay statements, the error was harmless due to the "overwhelming evidence" against Nieves.”
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.