Chapter 943

943.245(1m)(a) (a) Issued a check or order in violation of s. 943.24 or sub. (6); and

943.245(1m)(b) (b) Knew, should have known or recklessly disregarded the fact that the check or order was drawn on an account that did not exist, was drawn on an account with insufficient funds or was otherwise worthless.

943.245(2) (2) If the person who incurs the loss prevails, the judgment in the action shall grant monetary relief for all of the following:

943.245(2)(a) (a) The face value of whatever checks or orders were involved.

943.245(2)(b) (b) Any actual damages not covered under par. (a).

943.245(2)(c) (c)

943.245(2)(c)1. 1. Exemplary damages of not more than 3 times the amount under pars. (a) and (b).

943.245(2)(c)2. 2. No additional proof is required for an award of exemplary damages under this paragraph.

943.245(2)(d) (d) Notwithstanding the limitations of s. 799.25 or 814.04, all actual costs of the action, including reasonable attorney fees.

943.245(3) (3) Notwithstanding sub. (2) (c) and (d), the total amount awarded for exemplary damages and reasonable attorney fees may not exceed $500 for each violation.

943.245(3m) (3m) Any recovery under this section shall be reduced by the amount recovered as restitution for the same act under ss. 800.093 and 973.20 or as recompense under s. 969.13 (5) (a) for the same act and by any amount collected in connection with the act and paid to the plaintiff under a deferred prosecution agreement under s. 971.41.

943.245(4) (4) At least 20 days prior to commencing an action, as specified in s. 801.02, under this section, the plaintiff shall notify the defendant, by mail, of his or her intent to bring the action. Notice of nonpayment or dishonor shall be sent by the payee or holder of the check or order to the drawer by regular mail supported by an affidavit of service of mailing. The plaintiff shall mail the notice to the defendant’s last-known address or to the address provided on the check or order. If the defendant pays the check or order prior to the commencement of the action, he or she is not liable under this section.

943.245(5) (5) The plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a violation occurred under s. 943.24 or that he or she incurred a pecuniary loss as a result of the circumstances described in sub. (6). A conviction under s. 943.24 is not a condition precedent to bringing an action, obtaining a judgment or collecting that judgment under this section.

943.245(6) (6) 

943.245(6)(a) (a) In this subsection, “past consideration” does not include work performed, for which a person is entitled to a payroll check.

943.245(6)(b) (b) Whoever issues any check or other order for the payment of money given for a past consideration which, at the time of issuance, the person intends shall not be paid is liable under this section.

943.245(7) (7) A person is not criminally liable under s. 943.30 for any civil action brought in good faith under this section.

943.245(8) (8) Nothing in this section other than sub. (9) precludes a plaintiff from bringing the action under ch. 799 if the amount claimed is within the jurisdictional limits of s. 799.01 (1) (d).

943.245(9) (9) A person may not bring an action under this section after requesting that a criminal prosecution be deferred under s. 971.41 if the person against whom the action would be brought has complied with the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement.

943.245 History History: 1985 a. 179; 1987 a. 398; 1989 a. 31; 1993 a. 71; 2003 a. 138; 2005 a. 447, 462; 2007 a. 96.

943.26 943.26 Removing or damaging encumbered real property.

943.26(1) (1) Any mortgagor of real property or vendee under a land contract who, without the consent of the mortgagee or vendor, intentionally removes or damages the real property so as to substantially impair the mortgagee’s or vendor’s security is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

943.26(2) (2) If the security is impaired by more than $1,000, the mortgagor or vendee is guilty of a Class I felony.

943.26 History History: 1977 c. 173; 2001 a. 109.

943.27 943.27 Possession of records of certain usurious loans. Any person who knowingly possesses any writing representing or constituting a record of a charge of, contract for, receipt of or demand for a rate of interest or consideration exceeding $20 upon $100 for one year computed upon the declining principal balance of the loan, use or forbearance of money, goods or things in action or upon the loan, use or sale of credit is, if the rate is prohibited by a law other than this section, guilty of a Class I felony.

943.27 History History: 1977 c. 173; 1979 c. 168; 2001 a. 109.

943.28 943.28 Loan sharking prohibited.

943.28(1) (1) For the purposes of this section:

943.28(1)(a) (a) To collect an extension of credit means to induce in any way any person to make repayment thereof.

943.28(1)(b) (b) An extortionate extension of credit is any extension of credit with respect to which it is the understanding of the creditor and the debtor at the time it is made that delay in making repayment or failure to make repayment could result in the use of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation or property of any person.

943.28(1)(c) (c) An extortionate means is any means which involves the use, or an express or implicit threat of use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation or property of any person.

943.28(2) (2) Whoever makes any extortionate extension of credit, or conspires to do so, if one or more of the parties to the conspiracy does an act to effect its object, is guilty of a Class F felony.

943.28(3) (3) Whoever advances money or property, whether as a gift, as a loan, as an investment, pursuant to a partnership or profit-sharing agreement, or otherwise, for the purpose of making extortionate extensions of credit, is guilty of a Class F felony.

943.28(4) (4) Whoever knowingly participates in any way in the use of any extortionate means to collect or attempt to collect any extension of credit, or to punish any person for the nonrepayment thereof, is guilty of a Class F felony.

943.28 History History: 1977 c. 173; 1995 a. 225; 2001 a. 109.

943.28 Annotation An extortionate extension of credit under sub. (1) (b) is not restricted to the original extension of credit, but includes renewals of loans. State v. Green, 208 Wis. 2d 290, 560 N.W.2d 295 (Ct. App. 1997), 96-0652.

943.30 943.30 Threats to injure or accuse of crime.

943.30(1) (1) Whoever, either verbally or by any written or printed communication, maliciously threatens to accuse or accuses another of any crime or offense, or threatens or commits any injury to the person, property, business, profession, calling or trade, or the profits and income of any business, profession, calling or trade of another, with intent thereby to extort money or any pecuniary advantage whatever, or with intent to compel the person so threatened to do any act against the person’s will or omit to do any lawful act, is guilty of a Class H felony.

943.30(2) (2) Whoever violates sub. (1) by obstructing, delaying or affecting commerce or business or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or business is guilty of a Class H felony.

943.30(3) (3) Whoever violates sub. (1) by attempting to influence any petit or grand juror, in the performance of his or her functions as such, is guilty of a Class H felony.

943.30(4) (4) Whoever violates sub. (1) by attempting to influence the official action of any public officer is guilty of a Class H felony.

943.30(5) (5) 

943.30(5)(a) (a) In this subsection, “patient health care records” has the meaning given in s. 146.81 (4).

943.30(5)(b) (b) Whoever, orally or by any written or printed communication, maliciously uses, or threatens to use, the patient health care records of another person, with intent thereby to extort money or any pecuniary advantage, or with intent to compel the person so threatened to do any act against the person’s will or omit to do any lawful act, is guilty of a Class H felony.

943.30 History History: 1977 c. 173; 1979 c. 110; 1981 c. 118; 1997 a. 231; 2001 a. 109.

943.30 Annotation Commencement of a threat need not occur in Wisconsin to support an extortion charge venued in Wisconsin. State v. Kelly, 148 Wis. 2d 774, 436 N.W.2d 883 (Ct. App. 1989).

943.30 Annotation A threat to falsely testify unless paid, in violation of criminal law, is a threat to property within the purview of sub. (1). State v. Manthey, 169 Wis. 2d 673, 487 N.W.2d 44 (Ct. App. 1992).

943.30 Annotation Extortion is not a lesser included offense of robbery. Convictions for both are not precluded. State v. Dauer, 174 Wis. 2d 418, 497 N.W.2d 766 (Ct. App. 1993).

943.30 Annotation A threat to one’s education constitutes a threat to one’s profession under sub. (1), and a threat to terminate promised financial support could constitute a threat to property. State v. Kittilstad, 231 Wis. 2d 245, 603 N.W.2d 732 (1999), 98-1456.

943.30 Annotation A claim under this section is governed by the six-year limitation period under s. 893.93 (1) (a) [now s. 893.93 (1m) (a)]. Elbe v. Wausau Hospital Center, 606 F. Supp. 1491 (1985).

943.31 943.31 Threats to communicate derogatory information. Whoever maliciously threatens, with intent to extort money or any pecuniary advantage whatever, or with intent to compel the person so threatened to do any act against the person’s will, to disseminate or to communicate to anyone information, whether true or false, that would humiliate or injure the reputation of the threatened person or another is guilty of a Class I felony. For the purpose of this section, “information” includes any photograph, exposed film, motion picture, videotape, or data that represents a visual image, a sound recording, or any data that represents or produces an audio signal.

943.31 History History: 1977 c. 173; 2001 a. 109; 2015 a. 335.

943.31 Annotation A threat to injure a manager’s reputation unless a job was offered violated this section. State v. Gilkes, 118 Wis. 2d 149, 345 N.W.2d 531 (Ct. App. 1984).

943.32 943.32 Robbery.

943.32(1) (1) Whoever, with intent to steal, takes property from the person or presence of the owner by either of the following means is guilty of a Class E felony:

943.32(1)(a) (a) By using force against the person of the owner with intent thereby to overcome his or her physical resistance or physical power of resistance to the taking or carrying away of the property; or

943.32(1)(b) (b) By threatening the imminent use of force against the person of the owner or of another who is present with intent thereby to compel the owner to acquiesce in the taking or carrying away of the property.

943.32(2) (2) Whoever violates sub. (1) by use or threat of use of a dangerous weapon, a device or container described under s. 941.26 (4) (a) or any article used or fashioned in a manner to lead the victim reasonably to believe that it is a dangerous weapon or such a device or container is guilty of a Class C felony.

943.32(3) (3) In this section “owner” means a person in possession of property whether the person’s possession is lawful or unlawful.

943.32 History History: 1977 c. 173; 1979 c. 114; 1993 a. 486; 1995 a. 288; 2001 a. 109.

943.32 Annotation While a person who by use of force or a gun seeks to repossess specific property that the person owns and has a present right of possession to might not have the intention to steal, the taking of money from a debtor by force to pay a debt is robbery unless the accused can trace that ownership to the specific coins and bills in the debtor’s possession. Edwards v. State, 49 Wis. 2d 105, 181 N.W.2d 383 (1970).

943.32 Annotation Since attempted robbery requires proof of elements in addition to those required to prove burglary, they are separate and distinct crimes. State v. DiMaggio, 49 Wis. 2d 565, 182 N.W.2d 466 (1971).

943.32 Annotation It is error not to instruct on the allegations that the defendant was armed and that he attempted to conceal his identity, but it is harmless error when the facts are uncontroverted. Claybrooks v. State, 50 Wis. 2d 79, 183 N.W.2d 139 (1971).

943.32 Annotation On a charge of armed robbery, the court should instruct as to the definition of a dangerous weapon, but the error is harmless if all the evidence is to the effect that the defendant had a gun. Claybrooks v. State, 50 Wis. 2d 87, 183 N.W.2d 143 (1971).

943.32 Annotation If the evidence is clear that the defendant was armed, the court need not submit a verdict of unarmed robbery. Kimmons v. State, 51 Wis. 2d 266, 186 N.W.2d 308 (1971).

943.32 Annotation An information charging armed robbery is void if it fails to allege the use or threat of force to overcome the owner’s resistance. Champlain v. State, 53 Wis. 2d 751, 193 N.W.2d 868 (1972).

943.32 Annotation Theft is a lesser included offense of robbery. Both require asportation. Moore v. State, 55 Wis. 2d 1, 197 N.W.2d 820 (1972).

943.32 Annotation Taking a pouch from the victim by force and in such a manner as to overcome any physical resistance or power of resistance constituted robbery and not theft under s. 943.20. Walton v. State, 64 Wis. 2d 36, 218 N.W.2d 309 (1974).

943.32 Annotation When a victim testified that the defendant’s accomplice held an object to his throat while the defendant took money from his person and the defendant testified that no robbery whatsoever occurred, the jury was presented with no evidence indicating that a robbery absent the threat of force had occurred. It was not error to deny the defendant’s request for an instruction on theft from a person. State v. Powers, 66 Wis. 2d 84, 224 N.W.2d 206 (1974).

943.32 Annotation When a defendant lost money to a dice cheat and thereafter recovered a similar amount at gunpoint, the jury could convict despite the defendant’s claim that the bills recovered were those lost. Austin v. State, 86 Wis. 2d 213, 271 N.W.2d 668 (1978).

943.32 Annotation Sub. (1) states one offense that may be committed by alternate means. The jury was properly instructed in the disjunctive on the force element. Manson v. State, 101 Wis. 2d 413, 304 N.W.2d 729 (1981).

943.32 Annotation Armed robbery can be the natural and probable consequence of robbery. In such case, an aider and abettor need not have had actual knowledge that the principals would be armed. State v. Ivy, 119 Wis. 2d 591, 350 N.W.2d 622 (1984).

943.32 Annotation If the defendant commits a robbery while merely possessing a dangerous weapon, the penalty enhancer under s. 939.63 is applicable. State v. Robinson, 140 Wis. 2d 673, 412 N.W.2d 535 (Ct. App. 1987).

943.32 Annotation A defendant’s lack of intent to make a victim believe that the defendant is armed is irrelevant in finding a violation of sub. (2); if the victim’s belief that the defendant is armed is reasonable, that is enough. State v. Hubanks, 173 Wis. 2d 1, 496 N.W.2d 96 (Ct. App. 1992).

943.32 Annotation Extortion is not a lesser included offense of robbery. Convictions for both are not precluded. State v. Dauer, 174 Wis. 2d 418, 497 N.W.2d 766 (Ct. App. 1993).

943.32 Annotation This section does not require a specific intent that property that is demanded actually be transferred. State v. Voss, 205 Wis. 2d 586, 556 N.W.2d 433 (Ct. App. 1996), 95-1183.

943.32 Annotation Asportation, or carrying away, is an element of robbery. The asportation requirement provides a bright line distinction between attempt and robbery. There is no exception for an automobile that is entered by force, but cannot be moved by the defendant. State v. Johnson, 207 Wis. 2d 239, 558 N.W.2d 375 (1997), 95-0072.

943.32 Annotation The key to a conviction under sub. (2) is whether the victim reasonably believed that the victim was threatened with a dangerous weapon even though the victim did not see anything that was perceived as a weapon. In applying reasonable belief to the armed-robbery statute, courts must consider the circumstances of the individual case. State v. Rittman, 2010 WI App 41, 324 Wis. 2d 273, 781 N.W.2d 545, 09-0708.

943.32 Annotation The state’s attempt to retry the defendant for armed robbery, alleging the use of a different weapon after the trial judge concluded that acquittal on a first armed robbery charge resulted from insufficient evidence of the use of a gun, violated double jeopardy protections. It did not necessarily follow that the state was prevented from pursuing a charge of simple robbery however. Losey v. Frank, 268 F. Supp. 2d 1066 (2003).

943.32 Annotation Letting Armed Robbery Get Away: An Analysis of Wisconsin’s Armed Robbery Statute. Goodstein. 1998 WLR 591.

943.34 943.34 Receiving stolen property.

943.34(1) (1) Except as provided under s. 948.62, whoever knowingly or intentionally receives or conceals stolen property is guilty of:

943.34(1)(a) (a) A Class A misdemeanor, if the value of the property does not exceed $2,500.

943.34(1)(bf) (bf) A Class I felony, if the value of the property exceeds $2,500 but does not exceed $5,000.

943.34(1)(bm) (bm) A Class H felony, if the property is a firearm or if the value of the property exceeds $5,000 but does not exceed $10,000.

943.34(1)(c) (c) A Class G felony, if the value of the property exceeds $10,000.

943.34(2) (2) In any action or proceeding for a violation of sub. (1), a party may use duly identified and authenticated photographs of property which was the subject of the violation in lieu of producing the property.

943.34 History History: 1977 c. 173; 1987 a. 266, 332; 1991 a. 39; 2001 a. 16, 109; 2011 a. 99.

943.34 Annotation The fact that sequentially received stolen property was purchased for a lump sum was an insufficient basis to aggregate the value of the property; the crime of receiving stolen property does not require payment. State v. Spraggin, 71 Wis. 2d 604, 239 N.W.2d 297 (1976).