State v. Timothy L. Finley, Jr.
Appeal Number 2014AP002488 - CR
Supreme Court
CASE HISTORY
|
Status
|
Court
|
Filing Date
|
Anticipated Due Date
|
Activity
|
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
08-24-2016
|
Remittitur
|
|
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
07-12-2016
|
Published Opinion Citation
|
|
|
370 Wis. 2d 402
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
07-12-2016
|
Published Opinion Citation
|
|
|
882 N.W.2d 761
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
07-12-2016
|
||
|
Judge Panel: Roggensack, Abrahamson, Bradley, Prosser, Ziegler, Gableman, Bradley
Opinion: Opinion Decision: Affirmed and remanded Pages: 44 Written by: Abrahamson, Shirley S. Ziegler, Annette K. Wrote Dissenting Opinion 40 pages. Bradley, Rebecca G. Wrote Dissenting Opinion 19 pages. Order Text: The decision of the court of appeals is affirmed and the cause is remanded to the circuit court. |
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
07-08-2016
|
Public Domain Citation
|
|
|
Comment: PDC No: 2016 WI 63
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
04-07-2016
|
Oral Argument
|
|
|
Comment: 1st case, 9:45 a.m. Atty Thomas J Balistreri for Pla-Res-Pet; Atty Catherine Malchow for Def-App
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
03-22-2016
|
Briefs Received At State Law Library
|
|
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
03-16-2016
|
Reply Brief-Supreme Court
Reply Brief-Supreme Court |
|
|
Filed By: Thomas Balistreri
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
03-15-2016
|
Letter/Correspondence
|
|
|
Comment: From Clerk's Office to counsel: confirming oral argument date/time April 7, 2016 @ 9:45 a.m.
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
03-11-2016
|
Assigned for Oral Argument
|
|
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
03-01-2016
|
Response Brief-Supreme Court
Response Brief-Supreme Court |
|
|
Filed By: Catherine Malchow
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
02-10-2016
|
First Brief-Supreme Court
First Brief-Supreme Court |
|
|
Filed By: Thomas Balistreri
Comment: Appx to First Brief-Supreme Court |
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
01-28-2016
|
Response
|
|
|
Comment: 10 addl copies of CA briefs for SC
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
01-20-2016
|
Attorney Change
|
|
|
Comment: Added ASPD Malchow as counsel for Timothy Finley per filing of Notice of Entry of Appearance.
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
01-11-2016
|
Caption Amended
|
|
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
01-11-2016
|
Court Changed to Supreme Court
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
11-11-2015
|
Final Publication
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-30-2015
|
Fee Waived
|
|
|
Comment: Filed by AG
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
SC
|
10-29-2015
|
Petition for Review
|
|
|
Filed By: Thomas Balistreri
Submit Date: 11-17-2015 Decision: (G) Grant Decision Date: 1-11-2016 ORD petition granted. FRO briefs due 30/20/10. 1. SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, J. (concurring in part, dissenting in part). I concur in part and dissent in part from the orders granting review in three cases, State v. Finley, 14AP2488-CR, Wisconsin Carry v. City of Madison, 2015AP146, and Regency West Apartments v. Racine, 2014AP2947. The efforts of one member of the court to unilaterally issue the grant orders threatened to contravene the court's internal procedures and raises the scent of lawlessness in this court. 2. On November 16, 2015, the court adopted a procedure governing when a justice may hold a matter in which a Commissioner of the SC recommended granting review. The procedure provides as follows: A justice, who wishes to hold a matter for which a Commissioner has recommended granting review, must submit in writing, with his or her e-mail votes, the specific reason(s) why he or she would not approve the grant as recommended by the Commissioner. Within 5 calendar days of that writing, all justices shall vote, by e-mail, to grant the matter, deny the matter, or otherwise approve the suggestions in the written proposal. If sufficient votes to grant the matter remain, the grant order shall issue within two business days. If the matter no longer has the requisite votes to grant, it shall be discussed in a court conference, but in any event, no later than at the next in-person petition for review conference. 3. The procedure was adopted pursuant to the Introduction to the SC's Internal Operating Procedures, which states that the IOP "may be changed without notice as circumstances require." The new procedure was adopted without any notice to the SC Commissioners and Clerk of the Supreme Court, let alone the litigants, lawyers, and the public. As a result, even members of the court staff are not apprised of the court's internal procedures and may err in their work. 4. A Commissioner of the SC recommended granting review in one of these three cases. In the other two cases, no recommendation regarding the granting of these petitions was made. 5. Although I opposed adopting this procedure, I followed it in holding the petition for review that the Commissioners recommended granting. On 1/7/16, I submitted in writing with my email votes on petitions for review my desire to hold this case and the reason why I would not approve the grant recommended by the Commissioners. According to the process outlined above, the justices are required to respond to my hold within 5 days. 6. Rather than wait for the votes of the justices, shortly after I submitted my holds, one member of the court, emailed the justices that unless she received votes from a majority of the court to honor my holds, orders would issue granting the petitions for review. 7. On 1/8/16, before any votes on my holds were received from any member of the court, a single member of the court emailed the justices that, because no justice had agreed with my request, these orders... Motion Response Filed By: Martha Askins Submit Date: 11-17-2015 |
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-28-2015
|
Published Opinion Citation
|
|
|
872 N.W.2d 344
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-28-2015
|
Published Opinion Citation
|
|
|
365 Wis. 2d 275
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-28-2015
|
Opinion Ordered Published
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-28-2015
|
Public Domain Citation
|
|
|
Comment: PDC No: 2015 WI App 79
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
09-30-2015
|
||
|
Judge Panel: Stark, Hruz, Cane
Opinion: Opinion Decision: Reversed and remanded Pages: 22 Written by: Hruz, Thomas M. Order Text: Judgment and order reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings with directions. |
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
05-12-2015
|
Submitted on Briefs
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
04-06-2015
|
Briefs Received At State Law Library
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
03-18-2015
|
Record and Briefs Sent to District 3
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
03-17-2015
|
Reply Brief
Reply Brief |
|
|
Filed By: Martha Askins
Comment: received 10 copies of CA BRY for SC use 1/27/16 EW |
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
02-27-2015
|
Brief of Respondent(s)
Brief of Respondent |
|
|
Filed By: Thomas Balistreri
Comment: received 10 copies of CA BRS for SC use 1/28/16 EW |
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
01-16-2015
|
Motion to Extend Time
|
|
|
Filed By: Thomas Balistreri
Submit Date: 1-20-2015 Decision: (G) Grant Decision Date: 1-21-2015 ORD that the time for filing the respondent's brief is extended to 3/4/15. See BRS event due on 3-4-2015 |
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
01-12-2015
|
Brief & Appendix of Appellant(s)
Brief of Appellant |
|
|
Filed By: Martha Askins
Comment: received 10 copies of CA BAP for SC use 1/27/16 EW Appx to Brief of Appellant(s) |
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
12-09-2014
|
Order
|
|
|
IT IS ORDERED that the deadline for the trial court to decide the postconviction motion is extended to October 17, 2014.
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
12-05-2014
|
Sealed Documents
|
|
|
Comment: PSI #47
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
12-05-2014
|
Record
|
|
|
Comment: 1-1 to 117-1
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
11-14-2014
|
Notice of Reporter RE: Filing of Transcript(s)
|
|
|
Court Reporter Name: (Fick, Jennifer)
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
11-12-2014
|
Transcript filed in Circuit Court
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
11-05-2014
|
Other Papers
|
|
|
Comment: CRS filed by L. Koenig
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
11-03-2014
|
Statement on Transcript
|
|
|
Filed By: Martha Askins
Status: Ordered |
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-27-2014
|
Notif. Sent-Filing of NAP & Ct. Record
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-27-2014
|
Fee Waived
|
|
|
Comment: Filed by SPD
|
||||
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-27-2014
|
Notice of Appeal & Circuit Court Docket Entries
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-24-2014
|
Notice of Appeal filed in Circuit Court
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-08-2014
|
Order of Circuit Court
|
|
|
OCCD
|
CA
|
10-19-2012
|
Judgment of Circuit Court
|
|