Wisconsin Justice Initiative today urged Milwaukee County voters to tell legislators what they think about marijuana legalization.

Milwaukee County voters will see a legalization referendum question on the November 8 ballot.

The question asks whether voters favor “allowing adults 21 years of age and older to engage in the personal use of marijuana, while also regulating commercial marijuana-related activities, and imposing a tax on the sale of marijuana.”

At the press conference, WJI President Craig Johnson discussed criminal justice-based reasons for legalization, including the need to end sanctions that are enforced disproportionately against people of color. Current felony sanctions for possession cause lifelong harm by serving as a gateway into the criminal justice system, he said.

Johnson was joined by Wisconsin Justice Initiative Action President Joseph Czarnezki. Czarnezki summarized the benefits of taxing revenue from marijuana sales. “Our neighboring states, Michigan and Illinois, have legalized it. Why should we be sending all our tax dollars to those states?” he said.

Czarnezki noted that in a similar referendum in Milwaukee County four years ago, voters overwhelmingly voted “yes” for legalization. The current referendum is necessary because of the “need to keep the pressure on the state Legislature,” he said.

Milwaukee County Supervisor Ryan Clancy, who sponsored the resolution putting the referendum on the ballot, highlighted how criminalization hampers hiring and employment efforts. “These things are not just locking people up, it’s not just putting people back in jail and giving more work to our Milwaukee County employees, but it’s keeping people from getting jobs in the first place.”

Wisconsin Sen. Melissa Agard talked of the legislative bills she has sponsored for a decade. Those bills have been blocked or stuck in the Legislature, and voters need to tell legislators to get them moving, she said.

Cannabis educator and researcher Brad Rowe discussed how legalization and licensing of marijuana create safer usage and the opportunity for open discussion about marijuana use. For instance, someone using marijuana could call for medical help without the response of police officers as well, he noted. He described how current law impedes research into the medical benefits of cannabis for treatment of chronic pain, nausea, or other conditions.

Andrew Hysell of Forever Wisconsin served as emcee of the press conference.
​
Similar referendums will be on the ballots in Dane and Eau Claire counties and in the cities of Stevens Point, Kenosha, Racine, Appleton, and Superior.

WJI supports the legalization of marijuana to avoid the disparate and severe impact on minority communities.

Listen to a recording of the press conference by clicking the arrow at the top of this story.

​To study bail jumping in Wisconsin, WJI and the Mastantuono Coffee & Thomas law firm are looking county by county at 2021 bail-jumping charges. Which counties are charging bail jumping the most? Who are some of the defendants? What happens to those cases? We'll report the statistics from individual counties and tell you the stories from randomly chosen cases.

Dane County

Total number of cases with bail-jumping charges: 1,324
Total number of misdemeanor and felony cases: 5,611
Percent of misdemeanor and felony cases that include bail-jumping charges: 24%

Total number of felony cases with bail-jumping charges: 1,046*
Total number of all felony cases: 3,033
Percent of felony cases that include bail-jumping charges: 35%

Total number of misdemeanor cases with bail-jumping charges: 278
Total number of all misdemeanor cases: 2,578
Percent of misdemeanor cases that include bail-jumping charges: 11%

Largest number of bail-jumping charges issued in a single case: 36
Number of felony bail-jumping charges issued: 888
Number of misdemeanor bail-jumping charges issued: 36

*Felony cases can include felony or misdemeanor bail-jumping charges or both; misdemeanor cases can include only misdemeanor bail-jumping charges. Case counts reported as of January 2022. Criminal traffic cases are not included in this analysis.

Case file

​Random selection of a bail-jumping case this time reveals criminal behavior and bail-jumping charges spanning seven criminal complaints over about 17 months.

Danion Odell’s bail-jumping troubles began with a complaint alleging that in April 2020 in Monona, Odell put his girlfriend in a chokehold during a physical altercation. Odell was charged on May 11, 2020, with strangulation and suffocation, as an act of domestic abuse and as a repeater. The felony charge carried a penalty of up to $10,000 in fines and six years in prison. A domestic-abuse repeater allegation increased the potential imprisonment by two years, and Odell’s felony repeater status based on the 2018 burglary increased it by another four years.

Odell had prior convictions in 2018 for felony burglary of a building or dwelling, misdemeanor domestic-abuse battery, and misdemeanor criminal damage to property.

Dane County Circuit Court Commissioner Scott McAndrew released Odell on a $500 signature bond, with conditions that he not contact the victim or use or possess controlled substances without a valid prescription. By statute, in all felony cases the conditions of release also include that the person not commit any new crime.

The strangulation case remained pending a year later, when on May 8, 2021, police in Waunakee received a report of a man walking on the sidewalk slapping his face, stumbling, and yelling incoherently. Another report came in that the same man entered a parked white Jeep Compass.

Responding officers found Odell sitting in the driver’s seat of the Jeep. His speech was confused and his pupils were constricted. The officers asked Odell if he wanted emergency medical services and Odell said yes.

Odell was holding a plastic bag in his right hand, which the officers suspected to be heroin. Field testing confirmed it.

Odell was charged in late May 2021 with possession of narcotics, plus felony bail jumping for violating his release conditions from the strangulation case.

Misdemeanor bail jumping occurs when a person out on bond on a misdemeanor charge violates the conditions of that bond. Felony bail jumping occurs when a person out on bond on a felony charge violates the conditions of that bond.

Odell’s strangulation charge was a felony, so the bail-jumping charge was a felony, too.

A bail-jumping offense may not itself be a crime. Missing a court date, violating a local ordinance, having a drink, or using an illegal drug could all be bail-jumping offenses if bond conditions prohibit the activity.

On July 8, 2021, Dane County Circuit Court Commissioner Jason Hanson set a $500 signature bond in the heroin case, with the same restrictions McAndrew imposed — no drugs without a prescription and no new crimes.

On September 7, 2021, prosecutors filed a complaint against Odell for conduct allegedly occurring just two weeks after the heroin incident.

On May 22, 2021, Sun Prairie police were called to the Super 8 Motel for report of a theft. A housekeeper’s wallet disappeared from the lunch bag on her housekeeping cart.

Video surveillance footage showed Odell rifling through the cart, taking something, and putting it in his pocket. Odell was identified as guest at the motel. The motel clerk had photocopied Odell’s identification when he checked in.

Odell was charged with misdemeanor theft as a repeater, plus felony bail jumping for violating the terms of release in the strangulation case.

It appears Odell was not taken into custody when the wallet case was charged, as three days later, just before 9:00 a.m. on September 10, 2021, University of Wisconsin-Madison police were dispatched to the parking lot outside the Waisman Center on a report of a man shooting a firearm.

​Responding officers found Odell, matching the description of the shooter, in the parking lot. Odell’s voice was raspy, and he was swaying and leaning.

Odell confirmed he had fired a gun and said the weapon was inside his vehicle next to him. He had no explanation for being in the parking lot or holding a firearm.​

The Wisconsin Justice Initiative calls on U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson to stop airing misleading advertisements on the issue of cash bail in his race against Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes.

“Bail and pretrial release are important public policy areas that deserve careful attention, not distortion in 30-second ads for partisan gain,” WJI President Craig Johnson said on behalf of the organization. Sen. “Johnson’s ads seem designed to scare the public, not enhance understanding of the important issue of cash bail in Wisconsin.”

WJI is a nonpartisan public advocacy organization that does not take sides in political races. Nonetheless, it’s important that the public is informed with accurate and helpful information during a heated political campaign.

“First and foremost, the public should understand that good bail decisions are made by relying on evidence. Increasingly, criminal justice professionals understand that public safety risk is best determined by following that evidence, not throwing darts at a board marked ‘cash bail,’” Craig Johnson said.

“There has never been a reform contemplated in Wisconsin in which cash bail was ‘eliminated,’ and the doors of local jails are just thrown open, as (Sen.) Johnson would have you believe,” he said.

Real reform, which has been supported in the past by Democrats and Republicans across the country, including U.S. Sen. Rand Paul and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, focuses pretrial release decisions on the threat to public safety, rather than how much money a person has, Craig Johnson indicated.

“Locking up low-risk poor people before trial with high cash bail while rich people who may be dangerous can buy their way out of custody makes no sense, but Sen. Johnson doesn’t seem to understand that,” he said. He noted that the U.S. Civil Rights Commission released a report last year that highlighted the disparities in the cash bail system.

“It’s important to remember that unnecessary pretrial detention has societal costs and creates a two-tiered justice system – one for the rich and one for the poor. We should also recognize that studies have shown strong correlations between the length of time a low or moderate-risk person spends in pretrial detention and the likelihood that they would be re-arrested later in life. In other words, detaining low-risk individuals has societal costs – it can make us less safe,” Craig Johnson said.

“Sen. Johnson’s ads would have you believe that the efforts of Lt. Gov. Barnes and others in the legislature would end cash bail without a solution focusing on community safety, and that’s just not the case,” Craig Johnson noted. “He should pull his misleading ads and demand that the corporate super PACs supporting him pull their ads as well.”

The United States Supreme Court stated in Salerno v. United States, 481 U.S. 739 (1987), that “(i)n our society, liberty is the norm, and detention prior to trial or without trial is the carefully limited exception.” The words were written by then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

“Sen. Johnson, as a member of one of the most respected political institutions in this country, should not be jumping into the gutter with these misleading and fear-mongering ads. They do not advance the dialogue on this important issue one bit,” Craig Johnson said.
​
He also noted the importance of accurate debate on this subject in advance of a possible constitutional amendment proposal for Wisconsin voters this coming spring.

​
​Winning consensus for consent
 
Then it was back to the matter of the Consenting Adults Bill. The measure was next offered as a budget amendment and approved by the Democratic Assembly caucus. That should have cleared a path for approval. Instead, a few Democrats said they couldn’t vote for the budget bill because of it.
 
Clarenbach made the difficult decision to withdraw the amendment. It was later reintroduced as a standalone bill in the next session of the Legislature, and despite pressure from the conservative right it won bipartisan approval.
 
“In retrospect, I am certain that withdrawing the earlier amendment was one of the things that contributed to getting the Consenting Adults Bill passed,” Clarenbach said. “Suddenly I was seen in a different light and that next session I got elected speaker pro tem.”
 
Democratic Gov. Tony Earl signed the Consenting Adults Bill into law on May 5, 1983.
 
Once again, the right words helped make the case for the change. The issue was cast as one of “sexual privacy” – including for married heterosexual couples – rather than the repeal of what was known as the anti-sodomy law.
 
It all made for some interesting debate. Clarenbach remembers quipping that “95% of the adults in Wisconsin have violated the law and the other 5% have no imagination.”
 
Lest anyone think Wisconsin was going too wild, the final version of the bill included a disclaimer that “Wisconsin does not approve of sexual conduct outside of the institution of marriage.”
 
The Consenting Adults Law ended an unusual legal situation created by the passage of the nondiscrimination bill, as the late Dick Wagner, a longtime gay advocate, activist and historian, once explained in an Our Lives article.
 
Consider, Wagner declared, the “strange anomaly that for a year homosexual acts were technically illegal but you could not discriminate against people for them.”
 
Clarenbach later won other legislative victories, including on bills banning discrimination in health care and insurance for patients with HIV/AIDS, signed into law by Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson.​

​​"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications.
 
Italics indicate direct quotes from the application.​ Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.

​Name: Suzanne O’Neill
 
Appointed to: Marathon County Circuit Court
 
Appointment date: June 22, 2020 (elected to a six-year term in April 2021)
 
Education:
Law School – DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois
Undergraduate – St. Bonaventure University, St. Bonaventure, New York
High School – Trinity High, River Forest, Illinois
 
Recent legal employment:
January 2020-present – Deputy Trial Division director, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Wisconsin
2017-2019 – Regional attorney manager, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Wausau, Wisconsin
2004-2017 – Local attorney manager, public defender, same
1991-2004 – Assistant state public defender, same
 
Bar and Administrative Memberships:
State Bar of Wisconsin
 
General character of practice:
My practice centers around criminal defense of indigent clients, and includes representing clients charged with all levels of felonies, misdemeanors and traffic offenses. Additionally, my practice includes representing vulnerable individuals such as juveniles alleged to have committed delinquent acts, children alleged to be in need of protection and services, parents facing termination of parental rights and children and adults responding to petitions for civil commitments and protective placements.
 
Describe typical clients:
My typical clients are indigent, marginalized individuals. I have specialized in criminal defense cases, including felony, misdemeanor and traffic cases. Throughout my career, I have at various times specialized in particular areas of defense, including: sexual predator commitment cases, sexually violent offender cases, abusive head trauma cases, not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect cases, juvenile cases, termination of parental right cases.
 
Number of cases tried to verdict: More than 30 to a jury
 
List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:
I was counsel for the mother in a Termination of Parental Rights case, in Marathon County … from April, 2019 to January, 2020. My role as lead counsel was to prepare the case for trial. After deposing the relevant social workers, it became clear that social services had failed to provide adequate services to the mother who had cognitive limitations. The discovery through depositions forced the county to dismiss the petition. It was significant because by deposing the social workers, my client retained the rights to her child, keeping her family intact. Additionally, it brought to light the poor practices of social services which will presumably cause change in their operations and produce success with future families.
 
I was co-counsel in a complex felony domestic violence case, in Marathon County … from September, 2017 to April, 2018. I joined the case as co-counsel to assist a junior staff attorney when the case appeared to becoming increasingly complex. My role was to research motions, prepare for trial, and develop a trusting relationship with the client. The case was complicated by its similarities with allegations from a local mass shooting that had traumatized the community months earlier that had been reported extensively in the media. I successfully argued a change of venire motion that caused the prosecutor to re-evaluate the case and offer a deferred entry of judgement agreement. Our client avoided a felony conviction that would likely have resulted in a significant prison term.
 
I represented a client charged with a Class C felony drug offense, in Marathon County … from August, 2018-December, 2019. After thorough investigation, I was able to negotiate a reduction of the charge to a Class E felony. At the contested sentencing hearing, the court adopted my argument that probation was the appropriate disposition rather than the multiple year prison term advocated by the state. It was significant because my client was the mother of three young children; she struggled with chemical dependency but had never been afforded the opportunity for treatment. The sentence imposed provided her an opportunity for community based treatment while continuing to care for her children.
 
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: Experience limited to representing clients at revocation of community supervision cases before the Division of Hearings and Appeals
 
Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).  Experience includes consulting with State Public Defender agency leaders concerning agency compliance.
 
Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: None listed
 
Previous runs for public office: None listed
 
All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years:
Jill Karofsky, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2020
Lisa Neubauer, Wisconsin Supreme Court, 2019
Michael Moran, Marathon County Circuit Court, 2011
 
Professional or civic and charitable organizations:
Marathon County Bar Association, 2004 to present; president, 2013
Marathon County Criminal Defense Bar, 2011 to present
National Association for Public Defense, 2019 to present
Marathon County Library Foundation, 2013-2019, including as president and vice president
 
Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: None listed
 
Quotes:
 
Why I want to be a judge — Public service is my vocation. I went to law school with the purpose to become a public servant. I hoped to find a career in which I could help people who were struggling to find fairness and equity in a society that marginalized their existence. I wanted to advocate for just solutions in our often unfair and chaotic world. Upon graduating from law school, I came to the State of Wisconsin to serve its citizens as a public defender, where I have remained through my career. As a public defender, I have worked to ensure that indigent defendants receive a zealous defense and are treated fairly and with dignity. I have found fulfillment in helping marginalized individuals in the search of fairness and in advocating for justice for them. I have enjoyed being a voice for those who might otherwise be silent. I have attained satisfaction knowing that through my efforts individual clients have received justice and that they have perceived that they are valued in the judicial system, that their voice matters, that they have been heard and that the system has been fair to them.
 
I want to serve the people of Wisconsin as a judge because I want to continue to help people who are struggling to find fairness and equity. I want to find and apply just solutions to conflicts regardless of a litigant's stature in society. I want litigants to be heard, to be respected and to know that they are valued by the judicial system. I want to help people and entities navigate conflict and resolve conflict for them in an atmosphere of honesty, integrity, and dignity. The people of Wisconsin deserve a judiciary that will honor and respect the rights and liberties guaranteed by our constitution. Ensuring a fair, just and impartial forum for our citizens to argue and resolve conflict would provide me with personal and professional meaning and satisfaction.
 
The constitutional republic established by our country's founders remains the fairest and best form of government. The system of checks and balances adopted in our republic demand that each branch of government remain strong to ensure its continued success. It is important that judges act with courage in questioning the failures or abuses of the other branches of government. It is important that judges be audacious in the protection of recognized rights and liberties. It is important that the judiciary be comprised of hard working, well-reasoned, selfless judges seeking to better society rather than their own personal gain.
 
I want to serve the people of Wisconsin as a judge to ensure that the people of this great state have a judge who will work hard, listen attentively, reason thoughtfully, provide dignified resolutions to every conflict and communicate every decision in a manner honoring the importance of every issue to each litigant. I want be a judge who demonstrates the courage and audacity to protect the rights and liberties of the citizens of our state.
 
Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin.
The citizens of Wisconsin were once divided over the right of all couples to marry. A marginally enacted state constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman was held unconstitutional in Wolf v. Walker, 9 F.Supp.3d 889 (W.D.Wis.2014). Despite the Wolf Court's ruling, a divide remained within the state and the nation, as other states maintained marriage restrictions. Wisconsin's right of all couples to marry lacked complete legitimacy.
 
The United States Supreme Court resolved any remaining doubt that same sex couples have a right to marry in Obergefell v. Hodges … (2015). In Obergefell, the Court affirmed that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in a person's liberty, and thus, same sex couples must be afforded the right to marry pursuant to the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Obergefell delivered a nationwide message that all couples are free to marry, bridging a divide between states and within states, and positively impacting Wisconsin citizens.
 
In recognizing marriage as a fundamental right and protecting same sex couples who want to enter the commitment of marriage, the Supreme Court provided equality and dignity to gay and lesbian citizens. When a right is denied to a class of people, the individuals within the discriminated class inherently perceive that they are not valued, are insignificant and have no meaningful place in society. The Obergefell decision provided gay and lesbian individuals with renewed self-worth and dignity, while reminding others that all individuals are entitled to respect, regardless of sexual orientation.
 
Additionally, Obergefell provided children of same sex couples with a sense of security and belonging. All individuals need to sense that they are loved and that they belong to an acceptable community. Children are especially vulnerable and need reassurances of their value. When the family in which a child belongs is not respected, that child will struggle to find self-worth. Obergefell’s recognition that same sex couples have the fundamental right to marry and create a family, legitimizes those families. Mainstream acceptance of a child's loving family builds that child's sense of belonging and self-worth, empowering that child to prosper.
 
In recognizing that same sex couples have a right to marry equal to that of opposite sex couples, Obergefell placed the government's imprimatur on same sex relationships and advanced society's acceptance of the LGBTQ community. American society has frequently struggled to accept as equal people who are considered "different". The country has a long history of discriminating against those perceived to be of less value and importance because of their race, gender, or sexual orientation. Discrimination is born from fear of the unfamiliar and often develops into hate. Until society views all individuals as equal and until all individual differences are valued, discrimination will continue and hate will prevail. In Obergefell, the Court proclaimed that same sex couples are equal and that they have value in every society, regardless of state lines, positively impacting Wisconsinites.
 
Two or three judges whom I admire and why: While I admire many judges for their intellect, work ethic, skill and courage, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall and Circuit Court Judge Greg Grau are admired for their judicial respect of humanity and promotion of individual dignity.
 
Despite being born into an era beholden to Jim Crow laws, Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall tenaciously achieved success advancing civil rights and promoting racial equality. Denied admission to the University of Maryland Law School because of his race, Justice Marshall succeeded to earn a law degree from Howard University. Having personally experienced blatant racial discrimination, Marshall proceeded to dedicate his legal career to eradicating archaic segregation laws and to promoting equality and civil rights.
 
As an attorney, Marshall zealously and successfully argued unpopular positions in cases that ultimately advanced the civil rights movement and paved a judicial path to positive change. As a U.S. Court of Appeals Judge and Supreme Court Justice, Marshall continued to advance the fair treatment of all individuals and the protection of the inherent rights of all citizens, regardless of race. From the bench, Marshall displayed sensitivity to the injustices of discrimination and voiced opinions to correct inequities. He persistently valued the civil liberties owed to all individuals.
 
Although a conservative majority silenced Justice Marshall's voice on the Supreme Court later in his career, Marshall never stopped speaking the truth. He never stopped advocating for justice. He never lost sight of the marginalized individual and of the struggle of many to achieve respect, dignity and equality. I admire Justice Marshall for his determination in fighting for equality in the face of hatred, for his relentless advocacy for individual rights of all people, and his judicial protection and advancement of personal liberty.
 
Although Circuit Court Judge Greg Grau did not comparatively impact the nation's civil rights movement, Judge Grau did display respect for the individual rights of litigants, equal to that of Justice Marshall. Throughout his judicial career, Judge Grau presided over thousands of cases. He approached each case thoroughly prepared, having read all filing and completed relevant research. He attentively received the evidence and listened to the arguments. He rationally considered and balanced competing interests. He applied the law and articulated reasoned, legally supported and practical decisions. While I admire Judge Grau's preparation and methodical case processing, what I admire most about Judge Grau is his consistent treatment of all litigants with respect and dignity. He was patient, empathetic and considerate toward every individual, regardless of the circumstance that brought the person to court. Despite the numerous cases in which he presided, he treated every individual with the recognition that each court appearance was a crucial moment in a litigant's life. Judge Grau never minimized the importance of a decision; he never entered an order without thought and careful consideration; he never forgot that the individuals who appeared before him to resolve their conflict deserved his full attention, the right to be heard and to be treated with respect and dignity.
 
The proper role of a judge:
The proper role of a judge is to actively guide litigants through the court process and to resolve controversies pursuant to valid laws, while fervently protecting the rights and liberties of individuals and entities. Controversies are appropriately resolved and rights and liberties are properly protected when a judge interprets and applies the law conscious of beliefs and values of current society. A judge must resolve current controversies cognizant of the present world. As society changes, so too must our recognition of rights and liberties and our resolutions of conflicts.
 
At its core, the role of a judge is to be an impartial adjudicator. A judge must objectively listen to the litigants and witnesses, must consider the evidence and arguments, must research the issues, and must resolve the controversy while respecting the litigants and controlling the courtroom.
 
In resolving the conflict, the judge must consider existing laws and past precedent, and apply those precepts to the case presented. The role of the court is to apply the laws the legislature has enacted and to consider how earlier courts have applied the law. The doctrine of stare decisis is a cornerstone of our judicial system. A court's deference and adoption of relevant precedent promotes predictability and fairness. It provides notice of how laws will be applied and aids in the orderly operation of the judicial system.
 
Nevertheless, the role of the judge is not to simply rely blindly on precedent. The role of the judge is to consider how the existing laws and precedent apply to the current situation. Time and time again, courts have confronted and properly invalidated antiquated beliefs and presumptions, overruling precedent. Courts have redefined fundamental rights and liberties and recognized their need for protection, rights that likely would have never entered judicial discourse decades earlier. Without judicial evolution, judicial legitimacy would be lost.
 
The proper role of a judge is to guide litigants through the court process and to resolve controversies pursuant to valid laws and in consideration of sound precedent. A judge's role goes behind the uncritical application of the past. A judge's role is to exercise reasoned judgement and act to protect fundamental rights and liberties regardless of antiquated verbiage. As Justice Kennedy succinctly stated, judges must "respect our history and learn from it without allowing the past alone to rule the present."

Chief Judge Mary Triggiano reported that Milwaukee County Circuit Court is emerging from the pandemic, and the public and justice system participants can look forward to the future with optimism.

The misdemeanor court backlog is gone, and 475 jury trials have taken place since July 2020. Although “it was no cake walk,” the court’s commitment to public health and safety allowed the court to reopen more quickly than other courts around the state, she said.

Triggiano gave a state-of-the-court address at the Milwaukee Bar Association’s luncheon meeting on Wednesday, October 12.

“Sometimes things worked out” but other times the court “had to go back to the drawing board,” she said.

She called the pilot misdemeanor night court run by Judge Christopher Dee a success and noted the addition of multiple felony courts to address the felony court backlog, with reserve judges and court reporters hired using extra funding. Milwaukee County’s felony backlog still makes up about 12% of the backlog statewide, she said.

She thanked Deputy Chief Judges Judge William Pocan and Carl Ashley for their assistance in guiding the court through the pandemic while managing their own caseloads. She also thanked Wisconsin Court of Appeals Judge Maxine Aldridge White “for always taking [her] phone calls” and providing advice.

Triggiano indicated that despite the court’s best efforts, the public health crisis took a toll on court staff, causing a wave of resignations and retirements. In addition, the court is impacted by the shortage of defense attorneys available for appointment by the State Public Defender.

However, recent funding has allowed for the hiring of eight law clerks for the civil division. The court has received a grant for an eviction diversion coordinator. And Triggiano and Clerk of Court George Christenson worked on a budget that increases staff pay to attract and keep high-quality employees.

The court also plans to expand its mental health court, she said.

Following Trigginao’s talk a panel of three judges answered questions about the court’s adoption of videoconferencing for court proceedings.

Judge Jane Carroll indicated that videoconferencing “is here to stay” and was one good thing that came out of the pandemic. The court now needs to figure out how to best incorporate it going forward, she said.

Judge David Feiss remarked that virtual proceedings have made the court rethink its operations. For instance, criminal court had often held “cattle calls” with many cases given the same time for appearance and a full courtroom waiting for cases to be called, he said. Virtual proceedings caused a shift to staggered schedules, which “has improved the quality of the services we provide,” he said.

Judge Kevin Martens noted that virtual proceedings may have increased access for some self-represented parties who previously faced challenges in getting to the courthouse.

Martens was chief of the civil division during the pandemic and estimated that the length of time civil cases took to resolve probably doubled during the pandemic. However, even though resources may have been taken from the civil division to help the criminal division tackle the backlog there, the pandemic impacted the civil division less than the criminal division because many civil hearings could easily move to a virtual format.

Carroll echoed that comment. Because the family division does not hold jury trials and rarely involves someone in custody, that court was able to move very quickly to virtual proceedings, she said.

Martens indicated that when jury trials returned to the courthouse the entire civil division was allowed only one civil trial per week. That number is now up to four trials per week, he said.

​"Evers' judges" is our effort to present information about Gov. Tony Evers' appointees to the bench. The information is taken from the appointees' own judgeship applications.
 
Italics indicate direct quotes from the application.​ Typos, including punctuation errors, come from the original application even though we have not inserted “(sic)” after each one. WJI has left them as is.

Name: Katherine Sloma
 
Appointed to: Shawano-Menominee Counties Circuit Court
 
Appointment date: July 6, 2020 (elected to a six-year term in April 2021)
 
Education:
Law School – Ohio Northern University, Ada, Ohio
Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Green Bay
High School – Denmark High, Denmark, Wisconsin

Recent legal employment:
April 2018-present – City attorney, Shawano, Wisconsin
November 2004-present – Attorney, Aschenbrener Woods Lamia Schmid, S.C., Shawano, Wisconsin
 
Bar and Administrative Memberships:
State Bar of Wisconsin
Menominee Tribal Court
Stockbridge-Munsee Tribal Court (lapsed)
 
General character of practice:
I am in a small, general practice firm. I typically handle municipal matters, family law matters (pre and post-judgment), residential and commercial real estate transactions, small claims cases (eviction and collection), corporate formation, estate planning and probate. I also have a heavy guardian ad litem practice which includes appointments in guardianships, protective placement cases, CHIPS cases and pre and post-judgment family court cases. I was an assistant city attorney in the City of Shawano for approximatley 10 years. In 2018 I was elected city the attorney in the City of Shawano. I find myself in court almost every day.
 
Describe typical clients:
Many of my clients are local people seeking help from an attorney for the first time ever. It is typical for a potential client to walk in the office and ask to see an attorney immediately. Other typical clients are court-appointed guardian ad litem clients and municipal clients. I do not specialize in any particular area but I tend to have the greatest concentration of cases in "family law" and guardian ad litem matters.
 
Number of cases tried to verdict: 2 jury trials
 
List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:
 
Shawano County Case No. 18 CV 55: Shawano Redevelopment Authority vs. Dr. R.C. Samanta Roy Institute of Science
In this case I represented the Shawano Redevelopment Authority. … The basic summary is as follows: The R.C. Samanta Roy Institute of Science is a group in Shawano that has a very volatile relationship with the city, staff, elected officials, and residents. Over the past 30 years, the group has purchased various parcels of real estate within the city and the allowed the parcels to sit vacant and crumble. The buildings have deteriorated and are unusable. Residents frequently complained about the state of the buildings. As city attorney, I was able to negotiate a settlement which allowed the city to take possession of the property located at 214 and 216 S. Main Street in Shawano. The settlement also required the group to repair another of its deteriorating buildings. This was a major win for the city and as a result, the city is optimistic that it may be able to work with the group in the future to acquire more of the deteriorating properties.
 
Shawano County Cases 12 JC 47 and 13 TP 01 … and Milwaukee County Case No. 13 CV 6089
In the cases set forth above, I represented a young lady … I was her guardian ad litem throughout. …
 
The basic summary is as follows: As a toddler, [she] was placed in foster care. She was shuffled through foster placements and relative placements (and between a couple of states) for several years. She eventually was placed with a foster family in western Shawano County. They adopted her. As [she] entered her teen years, she got into some minor legal trouble, but had significant problems with her adoptive family. Shawano County began a CHIPS case. [She] was once again placed in foster care. Her adoptive parents sought to terminate their parental rights, and did so, with the understanding that [she] would be re-adopted by her new foster family …
 
Shortly after the termination of parental rights, but before the adoption, the family [including the girl and other foster children] were in a terrible car accident. … Six of the eight people in the vehicle died. [The girl] lived, but had significant burns. A civil suit followed.
 
This case was significant to me for many different reasons. First, it was significant to me because it was one of my earlier CHIPS guardian ad litem cases. The case lasted several years, and eventually ended when [she] aged out of the system. I really felt connected to this case, due in part to the length but also to all the "ups and downs" that were associated with it. Notably, this was the first case I was involved in where parents were able to "un-adopt" a child. It was heartbreaking and frustrating, but in the end, it was in the best interests of the child
 
After the vehicle accident, a personal injury case was commenced on [her] behalf and I was involved in the personal injury case as her guardian ad litem. This was also significant to me because it was a completely new area of the law for me. Ultimately the personal injury case settled and [she] received a significant financial settlement. As [her] guardian ad litem, I was able to participate in a large mediation with the multiple claimants. A significant and beneficial settlement was attained on [her] behalf. Upon the completion of the mediation, I was able to assist with the creation of a plan to distribute the funds to [her] via a trust. When the trust was in place, I was able to participate in minor settlement hearing in Milwaukee.
 
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies:
Early in my practice I appeared before administrative law judges as a public defender representing clients at probation revocation hearings. I would estimate that I took appointments in those cases for the first 3 or 4 years of my practice. Approximatley 10 years ago I appeared at a few hearings on Social Security Disability appeals before administrative law judges.
 
Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).
In my family court cases where custody and placement are in dispute, the parents are referred to local mediation held at the Shawano County Department of Human Services. As a party attorney, I am not allowed to participate in the mediation session. Nevertheless, I have a good understanding of our mediator's process and I must prepare my client for the mediation session(s). I explain what the client should expect during the mediation process and then and assist my client with the preparation of the mediation parenting plan.
 
I have participated in many divorce mediation sessions that finalize as case settlement conferences. These sessions typically do not involve matters relating to children but involve contested financial matters. My firm has used other local attorneys to mediate cases. Prior to the mediation session I prepare a mediation summary/letter brief for the mediator setting forth my client's position. At the mediation session I advocate for my client.
 
Finally, I have had the opportunity to participate in a few personal injury mediations. Most notably was a case in which I was guardian ad litem for a minor severely injured in a vehicle accident. I was not the attorney in charge of the personal injury case, but I had the opportunity to make recommendations and negotiate on behalf of the best interest of the minor child.
 
Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: N/A
 
Previous runs for public office:
City attorney, Shawano, Wisconsin, elected April 2018 and April 2020 (2-year terms)
 
All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: N/A
 
Professional or civic and charitable organizations:
Shawano Redevelopment Authority, board of directors, 2016-2018
Red River Riders, board of directors, 2013-2018
Shawano Area Community Foundation, board of directors, 2005-2012; scholarship selection committee, approximately 2010-2014
Waupaca County Bar Association, approximately 2006-present
Leadership Shawano County, participant and graduate, 2007
Shawano Youth League, concession volunteer, approximately 2008-2014
 
Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service:
I have made it an important part of my practice to undertake pro bono legal work. Each year I take one divorce or family case as a pro bono case. These cases are typically very difficult cases. Two of the more recent cases I handled as pro bono were extremely complex. In both of those cases, my clients were very abused women; one physically and the other emotionally.
 
The first client had been beaten to unconsciousness by her husband and essentially left for dead. I assisted her through the divorce process … and I also attended several of her husband's criminal hearings just to provide some extra support. The second client was a woman who was divorcing her husband due to his extreme drug use … Her husband faked a terminal cancer diagnosis. The community held a "benefit" to support family. Husband then took the benefit money to support this drug habits. Soon after it was discovered that husband did not have any terminal, or even significant on-going medical issue. My client was humiliated because she too had been "duped" by her husband. I was able to assist her through the divorce process for free to help her ease her significant financial strain.
 
A significant portion of my volunteer experience has focused on my stepson and his athletic activities. For many years, my stepson was involved with the Shawano Youth Baseball League, the Shawano Hoops Basketball Program and the Shawano Community High School Football/Basketball/Track program. During all his sporting seasons my husband and I volunteered countless hours working at the concession stands/field maintenance/running the "book" etc. ….
 
In addition, I have also spent time serving on various volunteer boards and committees. I have been on the board of directors of the Shawano Redevelopment Authority, the Shawano Area Community Foundation and its scholarship decision committee. Finally, I was on the board of directors for the Red River Riders Therapeutic Horseback Riding for the Disabled. For that program I assisted in the set-up of a yearly fundraiser (called the Day at the Races) and their large, one-time fundraiser sponsored by the Green Bay Packers - the 2016 Tailgate Tour.
 
Quotes:
 
Why I want to be a judge -- I truly desire to serve the people of Wisconsin and particularly Shawano and Menominee Counties as its first female judge. I believe that I can bring a perspective to this circuit court bench that has never been here before: that of wife, mother, sister, and daughter. I also think that the people of Shawano and Menominee Counties would welcome the perspective of a woman in circuit court.
 
When I came to Shawano, I was the only "female" private practice attorney in the county. At times, I had interesting encounters with people who want to see "that lady attorney." I recall once telling a colleague that I felt like people were picking me the same way they would pick out a puppy. They were basing their decision on gender, rather than the skill. Over time, clients saw that I could stand out just fine against the local (male) attorneys.

Case file

A switch at the wheel and subsequent drug use landed Floyd Travis John Davis in Crawford County court three times in just over a year.

In September 2020, a car driven by a female passed Crawford County Sheriff’s Deputy Joe Breeser. Breeser ran the license plates and found that the plates belonged to a different vehicle. 

Breeser followed the car as it turned off the highway, but he lost sight of it temporarily. 

When Breeser next saw the car, it was parked, and Davis was exiting the driver’s seat. Although Davis said he alone was driving, the female passenger admitted that the two switched seats after she turned off the highway.

Davis confessed to using methamphetamine the day before, but he gave Breeser his brother’s name and date of birth. Davis failed field-sobriety testing, was arrested, and then was taken for a blood draw under his brother’s name. 

Davis received five citations for traffic or ordinance violations.

The false identification was later corrected, and it turned out that Davis had a prior offense for operating while intoxicated or with a controlled substance in his blood.

Davis was charged with two misdemeanor crimes: second-offense operating with a restricted controlled substance in his blood (OCS) and obstructing an officer. The OCS charge exposed Davis to a fine of between $350 and $1,100 and jail time of five days to six months. The obstruction charge carried a $10,000 fine and up to nine months in jail.

Crawford County Circuit Judge Lynn Marie Rider released Davis on $300 cash bond, with conditions that he not possess or consume unprescribed controlled substances and that he submit to a urine test at the request of law enforcement. Upon a positive urine test, he was to submit to a blood test, too.

The case remained pending, with several adjournments while the district attorney waited for blood test results.

Bail-jumping charges arose while Davis rode in cars driven by others while out on bond.

In January 2021, Officer Jeremy Cliff of the Prairie du Chien Police Department stopped a car for a traffic violation. Davis was a passenger.

Cliff had Davis provide a urine sample under his bond condition. The sample was positive for methamphetamine and THC. Davis then consented to a blood draw.

Davis was charged with misdemeanor bail jumping, which carries a maximum penalty of a $10,000 fine and nine months in jail.

Misdemeanor bail jumping occurs when a person out on bond on a misdemeanor charge violates the conditions of that bond. Felony bail jumping occurs when a person out on bond on a felony charge violates the conditions of that bond. 

A bail-jumping offense may not itself be a crime. Missing a court date, violating a local ordinance, having a drink, or using an illegal drug could all be bail-jumping offenses if bond conditions prohibit the activity.

Rider released Davis on a signature bond with the same conditions as before — no possession or consumption of unprescribed drugs and provision of a urine specimen and possible blood sample at the request of law enforcement.

In September 2021, Davis was a passenger in another car stopped by Cliff. Again, Cliff had Davis provide a urine sample. Again, the sample was positive for methamphetamine and THC — plus amphetamine. Davis provided a blood sample as required.

Davis faced $11,100 and 15 months in jail on the original misdemeanor charges. He faced another $20,000 in fines and 18 months in jail for his continued use of drugs, exposed when he rode in cars stopped by the police.

Davis resolved the misdemeanor charges and tickets in November 2021. He pleaded no contest to the OCS and obstruction charges and to a ticket for operating without carrying a license. 

Rider sentenced him to $350 and 15 days in jail on the OCS count, a year of probation on the obstruction count, and $150 on the traffic ticket.

The two bail-jumping charges and four traffic or ordinance citations were dismissed on the motion of the district attorney.

​​Our methodology: WJI and Mastantuono Coffee & Thomas determined the number of felony and misdemeanor bail-jumping cases and charges in each county through court data. The total number of felony and misdemeanor cases filed in a county was obtained through the state's online court system. Cases selected for the "case file" section are chosen randomly through a random number-generator web site. The intent of the project is to show a variety of bail-jumping cases.

Name: Lisa A. McDougal
 
Appointed to: Richland County Circuit Court
 
Appointment date: June 2, 2022
 
Education:
Law School – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin
High School – West High School, Madison, Wisconsin
 

Recent legal employment:
June 2011-present – Assistant state public defender, Wisconsin
June 2005-June 2011 – General practice, McDougal Law Office, Avoca, Wisconsin
 
Bar and Administrative Memberships:
State Bar of Wisconsin
 
General character of practice:
Currently I serve as a public defender. I represent hundreds of clients each year primarily as defense counsel in criminal matters, both misdemeanors and all levels of felonies. I also represent clients in administrative revocation of probation and extended supervision matters, involuntary civil commitments, protective placement and guardianship matters, child protective services cases, termination of parental rights cases, paternity/child support matters, juvenile delinquency cases, and criminal extradition matters.
 
Describe typical clients:
Prior to working as a public defender, I worked extensively as a guardian ad litem in all types of cases (divorce, paternity, guardianship, protective placement, adoption, termination of parental rights). Now, as a trial attorney for the public defender, my typical client is an indigent criminal defendant. However, I also regularly represent juveniles and individuals (not necessarily indigent) subject to Chapter 51 proceedings.
 
Number of cases tried to verdict: 10+
 
List up to three significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:
The first case of significance I have chosen is a criminal jury trial in which I acted as defense counsel. It happened to be a trial that my client won, but that isn't why I see it as significant. It struck me at the time, and it continues to impress me today, that this is a great example of why our criminal justice system is as good as it is. Any time a criminal defendant indicates that they want a trial by their peers, the system should, and in my experience, does make room for it. It doesn't matter whether the case is a garden-variety misdemeanor or a case with issues of high societal importance. In this instance, my client demanded a jury trial. Without hesitation, the court scheduled the trial in a timely manner, the parties prepared their cases, the clerk assembled a jury, and the prosecution was put to its burden. This right is enshrined in our Constitution whenever jail or prison is a potential outcome. In Wisconsin, we take that right extremely seriously. Every court and every judge I have ever appeared in front of has agreed that preserving and facilitating the exercise of that right is paramount.
 
The second matter of significance I recount is actually a series of matters. These are cases where I have brought pre-trial motions asking the Court to determine whether there has been a violation of my clients' fourth amendment rights. This is very familiar work to a public defender like me. … By and large, every circuit court made a careful review of the facts related to each motion and made thoughtful determinations as to the legality of (what is usually) police behavior. In a day and age where police action is under the microscope, the everyday work of attorneys and judges who carefully review, litigate, and ultimately act as a check on state-sanctioned power and authority is important. I am persuaded that when the lines of authority are clearly and correctly drawn by our courts, all Wisconsinites are safer. This type of careful and thoughtful scrutiny benefits everyone and the significance of such motion practice should never be underestimated.
 
(Due to client confidentiality, I will not be submitting identifying information for these cases. I can address this with the committee if requested)
 
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies:
Most of my experience before an administrative agency is as defense counsel in revocation of probation and extended supervision cases. In this context, I have participated in many contested hearings in front of an administrative law judge. I also have limited experience representing clients in administrative health and human services substantiation of child abuse matters.
 
Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).I have limited experience participating in mediation as guardian ad litem, typically in child custody situations.
 
Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: Not applicable
 
Previous runs for public office: None listed
 
All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years: None listed
 
Professional or civic and charitable organizations:
Iowa County Bar Association, president, 2008-2016
 
Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: None listed
 
Quotes:
 
Why I want to be a judge -- I want to serve as a judge because I want to help people from all walks of life achieve correct and just results in their legal disputes. I want to do so while affording those same people the opportunity to be heard and for their positions to be respected. I believe my natural strengths coupled with my experience as a trial lawyer make me well-suited to fulfill the obligations and duties of that role.
 
I have spent the last sixteen years litigating cases in many courtrooms and in front of many different judges. I have observed firsthand what is required to be a good trial court judge. I believe that I possess the temperament, skills, and experience to preside over a court in a way that will advance justice, create and maintain a forum where litigants can be fairly heard, and maintain a respectful and efficient environment. I am very comfortable in a courtroom setting and enjoy interacting with others. I am articulate and able to express myself well both orally and in writing. I have been described as collegial and friendly. I am able to adapt to different scenarios, and to handle criticism and difficult situations.
 
Describe which case in the past 25 years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court or U.S. Supreme Court you believe had a significant positive or negative impact on the people of Wisconsin.
I believe the 2009 U.S. Supreme Court decision of Arizona v. Gant had a significant positive impact on the people of Wisconsin. Gant is a Fourth Amendment case involving the search of a vehicle incident to lawful arrest. The Supreme Court held that exceptions to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement in the context of a traffic stop culminating in an arrest and subsequent search of a vehicle must be justified by concerns for officer safety or the preservation of evidence. The decision distinguished and effectively overruled a previous Supreme Court decision (New York v. Belton). Belton led to an expansion of the so-called “automobile exception” in practice, whereby officers were searching vehicles upon arrest of individuals without reason. Gant stated there must be a reasonable belief that the vehicle must contain evidence of the crime or that there is a threat to officer safety in order for a search to occur.
 
While the vast majority of Wisconsin citizens will never be subject to an arrest or to a law enforcement search of their car, this case nevertheless has a positive impact on our citizens. Gant is just one example of a case that reinforces the right we all possess to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, redrawing the line of what is legally permissible in this situation in favor of individual privacy interests.
 
Vigilance by the courts surrounding individual privacy interests is of positive significance for Wisconsinites. The obvious overarching purpose for the Constitution’s warrant requirement is meant to provide an extra layer of protection for the average citizen. While carving out exceptions to the requirement is an expected and necessary occurrence over time as particular fact situations necessitate, nevertheless creating blanket exceptions that swallow the rule imperil the safeguards intended under the fourth amendment.
 
The average Wisconsin resident may not ever have the opportunity to directly apply Gant to their situation. Regardless, the Court’s willingness to address and halt the slippery slide toward all-encompassing exceptions to the warrant rule is good for every citizen. The privacy interests implicated by warrantless searches in general ultimately affect us all and the permissible exceptions should be narrowly drawn.
 
Two or three judges whom I admire and why:
I particularly admire Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Shirley Abrahamson. Both were not only brilliant jurists in my opinion, both of course made history in their own right and forged a path for women lawyers and women in general. In a profession dominated by men, it is all but impossible to learn about each of them and be anything but moved by their courage and tenacity. Their determination to practice law in the face of so much opposition and criticism speaks to the exceptional qualities each possessed, including the singular focus required to excel in their fields.
 
Their perseverance, work ethic, longevity, and impassioned dedication to the law were hallmarks of both women’s careers and lives. They served as champions of equality for all, advocates for the marginalized, and a direct inspiration to me to do more to better the lives of others through my work.
 
The proper role of a judge:
First and foremost, the role of a judge is to decide matters fairly and impartially. Additionally, judges have an obligation to know the law, competently analyze fact situations and apply the law to those facts. This requires intelligence, integrity, and independence. When issues are unfamiliar, a judge must research the law to find answers and/or effectively employ the parties to do so. When cases involve issues that require discretion and equitable results, a good judge must utilize common sense and good judgment guided by sound reasoning, understanding that every decision affects human beings and is therefore important.
 
Judges must be mindful that their position is one of public trust, and must comport themselves publicly and privately in a way that promotes confidence in the independence of their decisions specifically and the judiciary generally.
 
Extending courtesy and patience toward others is no less important to the role of a trial court judge. I have witnessed judges that are patient and courteous, and others that are less so at times. All of these experiences have left an impression on me about the importance of extending civility and thoughtful regard to all as a matter of habit.
 
A judge is also a manager, having to administer a court schedule that balances the ability of litigants to be heard while promoting the prompt resolution of matters. I have spent the last decade managing my heavy public defender caseload. Though not a comprehensive court calendar, I have nevertheless had to learn how to keep up with the demands of many, many cases at once. The ability to work well with the clerk of court is equally critical in achieving the most efficient and fair schedule possible.
 
Finally, a good judge is also an engaged member of the community, helping to address, in a larger sense, some of the ills that intersect with the court system. In Richland County, like so many rural Wisconsin counties, there are issues of poverty, mental illness, and alcohol/drug abuse that are prevalent themes in the court system. Additionally, economic, racial, and social disparities consistently play a role in undermining fair and equitable outcomes in a courtroom. Raising and maintaining awareness about the existence of and solutions to these problems is the way to achieve consistently fair and just outcomes. Utilizing evidence-based decision-making whenever possible helps to address historical and systemic bias. Likewise, developing a rapport with local law enforcement agencies so as to promote public safety in a way that addresses dangerous and unwanted behavior while protecting the vulnerable and disadvantaged is critical.
 
Enthusiastically supporting programs like treatment courts is one concrete way to help to bring some meaningful change to the community. I have a firm belief in the efficacy of the treatment court model. Additionally, understanding what resources are available in the community and how to utilize those resources helps judges find solutions to problems and disputes. Regular dialogue with stakeholders in these areas helps connect those needing resources with those providing them.