Wednesday, November 7, 2007

citate that case!!

From a decision issued yesterday by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals:

"VanCleve argues his statement is more explicit than other statements in which suspects successfully invoked their right to counsel. See Wentela v. State, 95 Wis. 2d 283, 292, 290 N.W.2d 312 (1980) ("I think I need an attorney"); see also State v. Billings, 110 Wis. 2d 661, 663, 329 N.W.2d 192 (1983) ("maybe I ought to see an attorney"). However, our supreme court explicitly overruled Wentela in Jennings, 252 Wis. 2d 228, ¶33. In Jennings, our supreme court held the Supreme Court's decision in Davis overruled Wentela, and further held that under Davis the statement 'I think maybe I need to talk to a lawyer' was not sufficient to invoke the right to counsel. Jennings, 252 Wis. 2d 228, ¶¶33-36. VanCleve's reliance on Wentela and Billings as controlling authority here evinces either extremely poor legal research or a deliberate misstatement of the law."

State v. Gerald A. VanCleve, No. 2007AP753-CR, slip op. ¶ 15 (per curiam)(emphasis added).

hat tip: Christopher G. Wren, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Appeals Unit, Wisconsin Department of Justice


| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference citate that case!!:


Post a comment