967.04(9)
(9) In any criminal prosecution or juvenile fact-finding hearing under
s. 48.31 or
938.31, the court may admit into evidence a videotaped deposition taken under
subs. (7) and
(8) without an additional hearing under
s. 908.08. In any proceeding under
s. 304.06 (3) or
973.10 (2), the hearing examiner may order and preside at the taking of a videotaped deposition using the procedure provided in
subs. (7) and
(8) and may admit the videotaped deposition into evidence without an additional hearing under
s. 908.08.
967.04(10)
(10) If a court or hearing examiner admits a videotaped deposition into evidence under
sub. (9), the child may not be called as a witness at the proceeding in which it was admitted unless the court or hearing examiner so orders upon a showing that additional testimony by the child is required in the interest of fairness for reasons neither known nor with reasonable diligence discoverable at the time of the deposition by the party seeking to call the child.
967.04 History
History: 1983 a. 197;
1985 a. 262; Sup. Ct. Order, 141 W (2d) xiii (1987);
1989 a. 31;
1993 a. 486;
1995 a. 77.
967.04 Note
Judicial Council Note, 1985: Subs. (7) to (10) replace prior sub. (7) and ss. 967.041 to 967.043. See the legislative purpose clause in Section 1 of this act.
967.04 Annotation
Like the prior statute and rules, these provisions authorize the court or hearing examiner to order the taking of a videotape deposition from a child likely to be called as a witness in a criminal trial or a hearing in a criminal, juvenile, probation revocation or parole revocation case, and to admit that deposition into evidence at such a trial or hearing.
967.04 Annotation
This revision repeals statutory language limiting such videotape depositions to cases where there is a substantial likelihood that the child would otherwise suffer severe mental or emotional strain. It authorizes such depositions to be taken whenever the trial or hearing at which the evidence is to be offered will commence before the child's 16th birthday. If it will commence after the child's 12th birthday, however, the court or hearing examiner must also determine whether the interests of justice warrant the taking and use of the child's testimony in this fashion. A nonexhaustive list of factors to be considered in making this determination is provided in sub. (7) (b), substantially similar to prior s. 967.041 (3), stats.
967.04 Annotation
Sub. (8) (a) is substantially similar to prior ss. 967.042 (3) and (4) and 967.043. Sub. (8) (b) is substantially similar to prior s. 967.042 (2).
967.04 Annotation
Sub. (10) is new. It prohibits the child from being called as a witness at the trial or hearing in which the videotape statement is admitted into evidence unless fairness so requires for reasons not known or reasonably discoverable when the deposition was taken. [85 Act 262]
967.04 Note
Judicial Council Note, 1988: Sub. (2) is amended to allow depositions to be taken on the record by telephone or live audio-visual means on request of all defendants, unless good cause to the contrary is shown. [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1988]
967.04 Annotation
See note to Art. I, sec. 7, citing Sheehan v. State, 65 W (2d) 757, 223 NW (2d) 600.
967.04 Annotation
Use at trial of videotaped deposition of 8-year-old sexual assault victim during which screen was placed between victim and accused didn't deny confrontation right. State v. Thomas, 144 W (2d) 876, 425 NW (2d) 641 (1988), confirmed and supplemented, 150 W (2d) 374, 442 NW (2d) 10 (1989).
967.04 Annotation
A retrial with new counsel does not render a videotape deposition admissible at the first trial inadmissible at the retrial without a showing that additional testimony by the child was required in the interest of fairness. State v. Kirschbaum, 195 W (2d) 11, 535 NW (2d) 462 (Ct. App. 1995).
967.04 Annotation
If state makes adequate showing of necessity, it may use special procedure, such as one-way closed-circuit television, to transmit child witness's testimony to court without face-to-face confrontation with defendant. Maryland v. Craig, 497 US 836, 111 LEd 2d 666 (1990).
967.04 Annotation
State v. Thomas: Face to Face With Coy and Craig - Constitutional Invocation of Wisconsin's Child-Witness Protection Statute. 1990 WLR 1613.
967.05
967.05
Methods of prosecution. 967.05(1)
(1) A prosecution may be commenced by the filing of:
967.05(1)(b)
(b) In the case of a corporation or limited liability company, an information;
967.05(2)
(2) The trial of a misdemeanor action shall be upon a complaint.
967.05(3)
(3) The trial of a felony action shall be upon an information.
967.05 History
History: 1979 c. 291;
1993 a. 112.
967.055
967.055
Prosecution of offenses; operation of a motor vehicle or motorboat; alcohol, intoxicant or drug. 967.055(1)(a)(a) The legislature intends to encourage the vigorous prosecution of offenses concerning the operation of motor vehicles by persons under the influence of an intoxicant, a controlled substance, a controlled substance analog or any combination of an intoxicant, controlled substance and controlled substance analog, under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving, or under the combined influence of an intoxicant and any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving or having a prohibited alcohol concentration, as defined in
s. 340.01 (46m), or offenses concerning the operation of commercial motor vehicles by persons with an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or more.
967.055(1)(b)
(b) The legislature intends to encourage the vigorous prosecution of offenses concerning the operation of motorboats by persons under the influence of an intoxicant, a controlled substance, a controlled substance analog or any combination of an intoxicant, controlled substance and controlled substance analog to a degree which renders him or her incapable of operating a motorboat safely, or under the combined influence of an intoxicant and any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of operating a motorboat safely or having an alcohol concentration of 0.1 or more.
967.055 Note
NOTE: Par. (b) is shown as affected by two acts of the 1995 legislature and as merged by the revisor under s. 13.93 (2) (c).
967.055(2)(a)(a) Notwithstanding
s. 971.29, if the prosecutor seeks to dismiss or amend a charge under
s. 346.63 (1) or
(5) or a local ordinance in conformity therewith, or
s. 346.63 (2) or
(6) or
940.25, or
s. 940.09 where the offense involved the use of a vehicle or an improper refusal under
s. 343.305, the prosecutor shall apply to the court. The application shall state the reasons for the proposed amendment or dismissal. The court may approve the application only if the court finds that the proposed amendment or dismissal is consistent with the public's interest in deterring the operation of motor vehicles by persons who are under the influence of an intoxicant, a controlled substance, a controlled substance analog or any combination of an intoxicant, controlled substance and controlled substance analog, under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving, or under the combined influence of an intoxicant and any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely driving, or in deterring the operation of commercial motor vehicles by persons with an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or more. The court may not approve an application to amend the vehicle classification from a commercial motor vehicle to a noncommercial motor vehicle unless there is evidence in the record that the motor vehicle being operated by the defendant at the time of his or her arrest was not a commercial motor vehicle.
967.055(2)(b)
(b) Notwithstanding
s. 971.29, if the prosecutor seeks to dismiss or amend a charge under
s. 30.681 (1) or a local ordinance in conformity therewith, a charge under
s. 30.681 (2), a charge under
s. 30.684 (5) or a local ordinance in conformity therewith or a charge under
s. 940.09 or
940.25 if the offense involved the use of a motorboat, except a sailboat operating under sail alone, the prosecutor shall apply to the court. The application shall state the reasons for the proposed amendment or dismissal. The court may approve the application only if the court finds that the proposed amendment or dismissal is consistent with the public's interest in deterring the operation of motorboats by persons who are under the influence of an intoxicant, a controlled substance, a controlled substance analog or any combination of an intoxicant, controlled substance and controlled substance analog, under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of operating a motorboat safely, or under the combined influence of an intoxicant and any other drug to a degree which renders him or her incapable of operating a motorboat safely.
967.055(3)
(3) No deferred prosecution. A prosecutor may not place a person in a deferred prosecution program if the person is accused of or charged with any of the following offenses:
967.055 Annotation
Sub. (2) does not conflict with separation of powers doctrine and is constitutional. State v. Dums, 149 W (2d) 314, 440 NW (2d) 814 (Ct. App. 1989).
967.06
967.06
Determination of indigency; appointment of counsel; preparation of record. As soon as practicable after a person has been detained or arrested in connection with any offense which is punishable by incarceration, or in connection with any civil commitment proceeding, or in any other situation in which a person is entitled to counsel regardless of ability to pay under the constitution or laws of the United States or this state, the person shall be informed of his or her right to counsel. Persons who indicate at any time that they wish to be represented by a lawyer, and who claim that they are not able to pay in full for a lawyer's services, shall immediately be permitted to contact the authority for indigency determinations specified under
s. 977.07 (1). The authority for indigency determination in each county shall have daily telephone access to the county jail in order to identify all persons who are being held in the jail. The jail personnel shall provide by phone information requested by the authority. In any case in which the state public defender provides representation to an indigent person, the public defender may request that the applicable court reporter or clerk of circuit court prepare and transmit any transcript or court record. The request shall be complied with. The state public defender shall, from the appropriation under
s. 20.550 (1) (f), compensate the court reporter or clerk of circuit court for the cost of preparing, handling, duplicating and mailing the documents.
967.06 History
History: Sup. Ct. Order, 71 W (2d) ix (1975);
1977 c. 29,
418;
1979 c. 356;
1981 c. 20;
1983 a. 377;
1993 a. 16.
967.06 Annotation
Defendant was entitled to court-appointed counsel in state-initiated civil contempt action. Brotzman v. Brotzman, 91 W (2d) 335, 283 NW (2d) 600 (Ct. App. 1979).
967.06 Annotation
This section gives public defender right to receive juvenile records of indigent client notwithstanding 48.396 (2). State ex rel. S. M. O. 110 W (2d) 447, 329 NW (2d) 275 (Ct. App. 1982).
967.06 Annotation
See note to 971.04, citing State v. Neave, 117 W (2d) 359, 344 NW (2d) 181 (1984).
967.06 Annotation
See note to Art. I, s. 8, citing State v. Hanson, 136 W (2d) 195, 401 NW (2d) 771 (1987).
967.06 Annotation
County must provide free transcripts to state public defender. State v. Dresel, 136 W (2d) 461, 401 NW (2d) 855 (Ct. App. 1987).
967.06 Annotation
A public defender appointed as post conviction counsel is entitled to all court records including the presentence investigation report; access may not be restricted under s. 972.15 (4). Oliver v. Goulee, 179 W (2d) 376, 507 NW (2d) 145 (Ct. App. 1993).
967.06 Annotation
State public defender may be denied access to jail inmates who have not requested counsel, and jail authorities need only provide over telephone that information necessary for public defender to assess need to make indigency determination in person under 977.07 (1) for inmate who has requested counsel and claims indigency. WAC sec. SPD 2.03 (3) and (5) (July, 1990) exceed bounds of this section.
78 Atty. Gen. 133.
967.07
967.07
Court commissioners. A court commissioner may exercise powers or perform duties specified for a judge if such action is permitted under
s. 757.69.
967.07 History
History: 1977 c. 323.
967.08
967.08
Telephone proceedings. 967.08(1)
(1) Unless good cause to the contrary is shown, proceedings referred to in this section may be conducted by telephone or live audio-visual means, if available. If the proceeding is required to be reported under
SCR 71.01 (2), the proceeding shall be reported by a court reporter who is in simultaneous voice communication with all parties to the proceeding. Regardless of the physical location of any party to the call, any plea, waiver, stipulation, motion, objection, decision, order or other action taken by the court or any party shall have the same effect as if made in open court. With the exceptions of scheduling conferences, pretrial conferences, and, during hours the court is not in session, setting, review, modification of bail and other conditions of release under
ch. 969, the proceeding shall be conducted in a courtroom or other place reasonably accessible to the public. Simultaneous access to the proceeding shall be provided to persons entitled to attend by means of a loudspeaker or, upon request to the court, by making a person party to the telephone call without charge.
967.08(2)
(2) The court may permit the following proceedings to be conducted under
sub. (1) on the request of either party. The request and the opposing party's showing of good cause for not conducting the proceeding under
sub. (1) may be made by telephone.
967.08(2)(d)
(d) Arraignment under
s. 971.05, if the defendant intends to plead not guilty or to refuse to plead.
967.08(3)
(3) Non-evidentiary proceedings on the following matters may be conducted under
sub. (1) on request of either party. The request and the opposing party's showing of good cause for not conducting the proceeding under
sub. (1) may be made by telephone.
967.08(3)(a)
(a) Setting, review and modification of bail and other conditions of release under
ch. 969.
967.08(3)(d)
(d) Motions under
s. 971.31 directed to the sufficiency of the complaint or the affidavits supporting the issuance of a warrant for arrest or search.
967.08 History
History: Sup. Ct. Order, 141 W (2d) xii (1987);
1987 a. 403; Sup. Ct. Order, 158 W (2d) xvii (1990);
1995 a. 27,
387.
Effective date note
Judicial Council Note, 1988: This section [created] allows various criminal proceedings to be conducted by telephone conference or live audio-visual means, if available. Requirements for reporting and public access are preserved. [Re Order eff. 1-1-88]
967.08 Note
Judicial Council Note, 1990: [Re amendment of (1)] Supreme Court Rule 71.01 (2) specifies when a verbatim record is required of a judicial proceeding. Such a record should not be required solely because the proceeding is conducted by telephone or live audio-visual means. Likewise, the requirement in the prior rule that all telephone proceedings be conducted in the courtroom or other reasonably accessible public place discouraged the practice of setting and modifying bail by telephone conference during hours the court was not in session.
967.08 Annotation
[Re amendment of (2)] The appearances, motions and waivers listed in this subsection are rights of the defendant. If the defendant consents that telephone procedures be used, any party objecting should show good cause. [Re Order eff. 1-1-91]
967.09
967.09
Interpreters may serve by telephone or video. On request of any party, the court may permit an interpreter to act in any criminal proceeding, other than trial, by telephone or live audiovisual means.
967.09 History
History: Sup. Ct. Order, 141 W (2d) xiii (1987);
1987 a. 403.
