|
"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: Emily Nolan-Plutchak
Appointed to: Wood County Circuit Court Appointment date: July 9, 2025, to term ending July 31, 2026 Education: Law School – Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Madison High School – Madison West High, Madison, Wisconsin Recent legal employment: April 2023-present – Local attorney manager for Wood and Adams counties, Wisconsin State Public Defender, Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin May 2007-present – Assistant state public defender, Wisconsin State Public Defenders, Stevens Point, Wisconsin November 2006-May 2007 – Assistant public defender attorney, Missouri State Public Defender, St. Joseph, Missouri June 2005-November 2006 – Attorney, private practice, Madison, Wisconsin Bar and administrative memberships: State Bar of Wisconsin General character of practice: I am an Assistant State Public Defender Attorney, representing indigent adult and juvenile clients in criminal and civil cases.in Wood County. Since April of 2023, I have been the Local Attorney Manager in the Wisconsin Rapids Office, managing five attorneys, two support staff and one investigator. I handle misdemeanor and felony trial cases. I handle administrative hearings for probation revocation. I handle civil matters including guardianships, termination of parental rights cases and mental health commitments. I also represent juveniles in delinquency cases. Additionally, serve as adversary counsel for children in Children in Need of Protection and Services cases. In addition to hearings and depositions, my practice includes significant trial work. During my career I have handled over 2,500 cases. Describe typical clients: My clients, typically, are rural community members living in poverty many of whom have mental health issues and/or substance use disorders. My experience with their cases has been one of the reasons I have worked so diligently and collaboratively to create drug treatment programs, expand treatment options, and improve access to mental health services in the communities I serve. Number of cases tried to verdict: 18 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: Adams County Case 24TP2 I represented the mother in a termination of parental rights and then represented her at jury trial (January 29 and January 30, 2025), I successfully argued that Adams County Health and Human Services did not make reasonable efforts to reunify my client with her child and did not make appropriate accommodations in working with my client. I successfully showed at trial that my client wasn't able to read, yet no one at Adams County Health and Human Services (HHS) read to her any of the-documents in her case. The jury found that HHS did not make reasonable efforts to reunify my client with her child so there were no grounds to terminate her rights. This case was significant because my client was a teenage mother who had been failed by human services and the criminal justice system her entire life. Health and Human Services presumed because my client was incarcerated, young, and poor with a cognitive delay that she was not capable of parenting her child. The verdict forced Health and Human Services to actually provide services to my client so she has a chance at reunification with her child even though she is currently incarcerated. My client is now having visits with her child and is working with Health and Human Services to get the services that she needs to be successful. HHS is required to make appropriate accommodations so that she can be successful. She is looking forward to being released from prison and taking part in a year long Department of Corrections (DOC) program that helps people with mental health issues successfully transition in to society. Wood County Case 22CF388 My client was an 18 year old brown child, who was charged with attempted 1st degree intentional homicide for allegedly shooting a person in the head. This case contained a lot of video surveillance from the hotel where the incident happened. However, when the State provided me with the video, it was all in 30 second snippets. We had to piece together all the video in order to get an accurate picture of what happened in the middle of 'the night in that parking lot. Once we pieced all the video together, we discovered that there were witnesses present whom law enforcement never talked to. There was no indication on the video that the gun had been fired. Furthermore, the alleged victim did not speak English and law enforcement never utilized a translator when speaking to him. We had the video translated and the alleged victim told police that he had been hit, not shot. We then were able to hire an expert who opined that the alleged victim was never shot but rather it was likely he had been hit in the head with a beer bottle. This was a significant case because law enforcement clearly had tunnel vision. They saw a brown young man with a gun and made inferences that they could not back up with evidence. My client thought his life was over because he was brown and accused of attempted 1st degree intentional homicide. I was able to show him that even though the criminal justice system is often broken, that there are still people who will ensure that his rights are protected and there are people that will fight for him. On January 30, 2024 the case was dismissed by the District Attorney. Wood County Case 18CF191 My client was charged with possession with intent of heroin (10 to 50 grams) party to a crime, possession with intent of cocaine (15 to 40·grams) party to a crime, and maintaining a drug trafficking place. My client had been using heroin since high school. She had post traumatic stress disorder due to being present when her friend was killed while attempting to buy drugs in Milwaukee. My client felt an immense amount of guilt about that and stayed perpetually high on opiates. My client had been allowing drug dealers to live in her home because they gave her free drugs as payment. My client was also sexually assaulted many times during this period. Her house had become a drug haven where people came to buy and use drugs. Law enforcement believed my client was the root of the problem. I was able to convince law enforcement that due to the trauma in her past life, she was being taken advantage of by drug dealers in the community and was, in actuality, not the problem. Because I was able to convince law enforcement that she had significant trauma law enforcement supported her getting in to drug treatment court. I was then able to convince the assistant district attorney that even though she had very significant charges that she should be given a chance. Law enforcement was skeptical that she was going to be able to complete the program but I believed if she got the proper treatment she could be successful. During drug treatment court she received the proper treatment for her dual mental health and substance use disorder diagnosis. She started taking classes at the local technical college, she had a drug free baby and was able to fix relationships that she had with her family that had been destroyed due to her substance use. She graduated from drug treatment court on December 15, 2021. The felonies that had been diverted in to drug court were dismissed upon her graduation from drug court. Because of that, she has no felony convictions. She now lives in Waukesha, is raising her daughter and has received a diploma from technical college in cosmetology. She has been sober for 5 years. She has had no further interaction with the criminal justice system. This case was significant in Wood County because I was able to convince stakeholders involved in her case to look at her as a complete person and not just the crimes that she was charged with. She was then able to show them through her success that people with very serious traumatic pasts and very serious substance use disorders can be successful if given the proper tools and treatment. Her success opened the door to the treatment court to many people who may have not been considered in the past due to the severity of their charges. Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies: I have worked for the State Public Defender for 18 years. During this time I have represented countless clients at probation revocation hearings. These hearings utilize administrative codes and procedures. I defend people who are alleged to have violated their rules of supervision while on probation or extended supervision. I advocate for alternatives to revocation that the Department of Corrections may have overlooked. I also help find resources for my client so they can be successful on supervision. Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation). While I have not engaged in formal arbitration or mediation cases, I have worked closely in my revocation matters with the DOC to find alternatives to revocation. Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization: College Democrats at UWSP - 1999-2000, member College Democrats at UW-Madison - 2000-2002, member Tammy Baldwin for House of Representatives - 1999, volunteer Al Gore for President - 2000, volunteer Jim Doyle for Governor - 2003, volunteer Jim Doyle for Governor - 2008, volunteer Barack Obama for President - 2008, volunteer Barack Obama for President - 2012, volunteer Tammy Baldwin for Senate - 2013, volunteer Hillary Clinton for President - 2016, volunteer Joe Biden for President - 2020 & 2024, volunteer Kamala Harris for President - 2024, volunteer 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: Portage County Bar Association, 2007-present Wood County Bar Association, 2007-present Wisconsin Association of Treatment Court Professionals, board member, 2012-2023; other roles including president, 2017-2019 Wood County Adult Drug Treatment Court, team member, 2007-present Wood County Drug Task Force, chair of Harm Reduction, 2017-2020 Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service: Wisconsin Rapids Raptor's Youth Football League – Board Member of Wisconsin Rapids youth tackle football and cheerleading program. As a board member I helped with outreach, registration, planning, fundraising, scholarship, practice, games and planning of banquets. The league has been able to maintain low costs by parent participation, minimal registration costs, fundraising and providing scholarships for children who cannot afford the registration costs so that every child who wants to participate is able to participate. Grove Parent Group – Member of the Grove Elementary parent group which was dedicated to focusing on disparities in learning due to socio-economic, racial and cultural differences at Grove Elementary School. A focus of the group was providing support to parents who struggled at engagement with the school because of past negative experiences with the educational system. Three Bridges Recovery – Board member for recovery coach non-profit organization. Three Bridges started as a grass roots non-profit in Wood County and now has contracts for recovery coach services all over the state, Preemie Mom’s Group – Leader, and founder, of a group dedicated to supporting moms who gave birth prematurely, at 32 weeks or less. A focus of the group was moms supporting moms through the unique experience of parenting babies in the NICU. I have mentored numerous attorneys and several law school interns while I have been a State Public Defender. Quotes: Why I want to be a judge: My desire to serve the people of Wood County and Wisconsin as a judge arises from my longstanding commitment to being part of collaborative efforts to improve the criminal justice system and my knowledge of the impact judges can have within the courthouse and throughout the larger community. During my 18 years as a public defender, I have seen individuals and families on some of the worst days of their lives. The vast majority of the people I represent struggle with addiction and/or mental health issues. Many of them have been victims of crimes and/or abuse themselves. The trauma they carry is another huge factor in why they end up in the criminal justice system. I am an optimist. I can imagine a world—although we are not there yet—in which people’s interaction with the criminal justice system leaves them in a better place than when they entered it. My extensive involvement in the treatment courts in Wood County and throughout the state gives me optimism. Judges have traditionally seen their role as limited in addressing addiction or other issues that bring people into court. To improve the system and the outcomes for the people who find themselves caught up in it, Judges must embrace ways to move from a reactive, non-collaborative way of doing things. Judges are crucial to a Treatment Court’s success. They must offer leadership, support, and work as part of a team to make treatment court as effective as possible. I have seen Judges do that. The difference that approach can make in an individual’s life and future inspires me to serve. My desire to serve also stems from my deep professional and personal connections to Wood County. I am actively engaged in the Wood County legal community, fostering and embracing opportunities to create partnerships among law enforcement, public defenders, prosecutors, non-profits, and schools. On a personal level, Wood County is where I have chosen to raise my bi-racial twin boys, who are now in middle school. I am involved in community, parent, school, and sports booster clubs, including starting a “Preemie Mom Group,” which is dedicated to supporting moms who have had babies in the NICU and the unique experience of parenting preemies. Judges must be connected to their local communities. They are seen as leaders in the legal community and as the public face of the justice system. As a Judge, I will be committed to serving the people of Wood County with the same integrity, compassion, professionalism, humility, focus on collaboration, and dedication to justice I have brought to my work as a public defender. 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. Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) The U.S. Supreme court case Crawford v Washington is a decision that had a huge impact In Wisconsin, and across the nation. In Crawford, the Supreme Court guaranteed individuals accused of a crime the right to confront their accusers. The Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford marked a watershed moment in Confrontation Clause jurisprudence. Crawford established that the admission of testimonial hearsay against a criminal defendant violates the Sixth Amendment unless the declarant is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity for cross-examination. Crawford is an important decision because domestic violence prosecutions in the 1990s had worn away the rights of defendants to confront their accuser. In domestic violence prosecutions prosecutors were able to utilize hearsay testimony that had a mere “indicia of reliability” rather than requiring direct testimony that could be tested. In Crawford, the Court rejected the reliability-based standard set forth previously in Ohio v. Roberts, holding that the Sixth Amendment guarantees the procedural right of confrontation rather than a substantive reliability assessment. The Supreme Court noted that the reliability standard was vague and therefore could be manipulated to strip the defendants of their constitutional rights. This new standard limited prosecutorial reliance on out-of-court testimonial evidence. Importantly, it refocused Confrontation Clause analysis on procedural safeguards rather than judicial discretion, thereby reinforcing the adversarial process and due process protections. While Crawford applies nationally, its relevance is particularly acute in Wisconsin following the enactment of Marsy’s Law in 2020. The intersection of Crawford and Marsy’s Law underscores a conflict between protecting the rights of crime victims and preserving the due process rights of the accused. Marsy’s Law amended Wisconsin’s Constitution. It gave victims’ rights standing in criminal proceedings, including the right to refuse pretrial interviews or discovery requests to the defense. While the intent of Marsy’s Law is commendable, its broad and sometimes ambiguous language has generated significant legal uncertainty. Specifically, by granting victims the right to refuse to be interviewed or subject to discovery, the amendment intrudes on a defense’s access to exculpatory evidence and obstructs vigorous and effective pretrial investigation. In sum, for defense counsel in Wisconsin, Crawford has remained a powerful tool in safeguarding the integrity of the trial process and ensuring that testimonial evidence is subjected to adversarial testing. However, the expanded rights under Marsy’s Law have imposed new limits on traditional pretrial investigative avenues, thereby impeding the ability to effectively investigate and represent clients. As courts, prosecutors, and defense attorneys work to navigate this evolving terrain, Crawford will continue to serve as a necessary constitutional check ensuring that even in a victim-centered system, the fundamental rights of the accused remain protected. Two or three judges whom I admire and why: Judge James Mason, Wood County Circuit Court Judge Mason was widely respected not only for his legal acumen but also for his unwavering commitment to fairness, community service, and integrity on the bench. I admired Judge Mason’s professionalism and the care he took when making decisions. Judge Mason always explained to defendants why he was making the decisions he was which ensured both my clients and I felt heard by him. His courtroom was a place where litigants—whether represented or pro se—could feel confident that their case had been judged fairly. Beyond his work on the bench, Judge Mason served as a mentor to many younger attorneys and court officials in Wood County. His guidance extended beyond legal knowledge. He modeled how to uphold ethics, serve the public, and maintain humility in a position of authority. His leadership within the courthouse helped foster a culture of respect, learning, and dedication to public service Judge Mason leaves a legacy of thoughtful jurisprudence, professional humility, and genuine compassion for the people affected by the legal system. These qualities make him a figure worthy of lasting admiration. Judge Barbara Crabb, Western District of Wisconsin Judge Crabb was the first woman to serve as a federal judge in Wisconsin and she ruled in significant cases for equality, civil rights, and liberty. I admire her for her commitment to justice, constitutional integrity, and public service. I admire the tough cases that Judge Crabb made decisions on and her willingness to always follow the law and do the right thing, even when the decision would be a controversial one. Judge Crabb made decisions in many cases that were very impactful in Wisconsin. Judge Crabb struck down Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage, declaring it unconstitutional and affirming the fundamental right to marry for all individuals. Judge Crabb also played a pivotal role in affirming the treaty rights of Native American tribes in Wisconsin. These decisions were instrumental in addressing historical injustices and promoting reconciliation. Additionally, Judge Crabb was instrumental in causing change at the notorious and horrific Supermax prison in Boscobel, WI. Judge Crabb is known for being clear and having a balanced and thorough analysis of the law. Her decisions often reflect a deep concern for civil liberties. Judge Crabb has often shown courage in her decisions based on the law, even when her decisions were unpopular or controversial. Judge Crabb is worthy of admiration for her lasting impact on Wisconsin. The proper role of a judge: Judges must decide cases based solely on the law and the facts presented, without bias, prejudice, or outside influence. They must be impartial. Over the course of my legal career, I have had the opportunity to observe and appear in front of many judges. All good judges share traits in common. They know the law. They maintain a professional courtroom environment where respect is extended to all participants, regardless of status. They work hard, with integrity and humility. Judges must respect due process and fairness. They must ensure that all parties receive a fair opportunity to be heard and that proceedings are conducted with respect for legal rights and procedures. Judges bring their values and experiences with them to their work as a judge. For example, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who worked as a federal public defender, has highlighted the need for judges to make sure they are understood by all parties in a proceeding. Justice Jackson said, “One of the things I discovered very early on was how few of my clients really understood what had happened to them in the trial process. And so when I became a judge, I really focused on being clear." A judge’s decisions should be reasoned and articulated clearly, providing a basis for understanding and, if necessary, appeal. Judges are protectors of constitutional rights and the guardians of constitutional liberties. Judges must ensure that government power is exercised within legal bounds. And finally, by embodying integrity, competence, fairness, fealty to the rule of law, and respect for all who come before them, judges uphold public confidence in the judicial system.
0 Comments
The Legislature wraps up 2025 with new crimes, new bills, and proposals that keep ticking along11/24/2025  The Wisconsin Assembly on Sept. 19, 2025. The Assembly adjourned again last week and will reconvene in January 2026. Photograph by Margo Kirchner. By Alexandria Staubach
The final floor period in 2025 for the Wisconsin Legislature just wrapped up, with legislators passing a new crime for retail theft and an increased penalty for impersonating law enforcement. In addition, a bill with potential to provide voters more clarity when casting their ballots on constitutional amendments passed in the Assembly and finally had a public hearing in the Senate. All summaries below are quotes from the analysis provided by the Legislative Reference Bureau unless italicized (WJI’s additions). The titles are WJI’s summaries of the often lengthy and sometimes misleading titles provided by the bills' authors. When the bills in the Assembly and Senate are generally the same, WJI links to just one. An asterisk * denotes a bill substantially similar to one introduced in a previous session but which either failed to pass or was vetoed by the governor. For a refresher on the lifecycle of a bill, you can find that here. The rough progression of a successful bill is: introduction → referral to committee → passage by committee → vote by full chamber → transfer to the other chamber to go through the prior three steps there, too → to the governor for signature. An “enrolled” bill is one headed to the governor’s desk. Bills headed to Gov. Tony Evers for signature or veto: AB89/SB92 — Retail theft enhanced penalties Under current law, the penalty for the crime of property theft varies by the value of the property taken…. Similarly, the penalty for the crime of retail theft varies by the value of the merchandise or service that is taken…. This bill specifies that, if, in a six-month period, a defendant commits more than one violation of property theft or more than one violation of retail theft, the value of items taken at each violation may be aggregated and the crimes may be prosecuted as one property theft crime or one retail theft crime. The penalty for the crime would be determined by the aggregated value of the items taken. Creates a new crime. Status: Enrolled. AB136/SB132 -- Impersonating an officer Under current law, a person may not impersonate a peace officer, a fire fighter, an emergency services medical practitioner, or an emergency medical provider with the intent to mislead others into believing that the person is actually an officer, a fire fighter, or emergency personnel. Current law classifies the crime as a Class A misdemeanor. This bill changes the classification to a Class I felony. Status: Enrolled. SB202/AB165 -- Guaranteed income prohibition This bill prohibits a political subdivision from expending moneys of the political subdivision for the purpose of making payments to individuals under a guaranteed income program. “Guaranteed income program” is defined under the bill to mean a program under which individuals are provided with regular periodic cash payments that are unearned and that may be used for any purpose. Programs under which an individual is required to perform work or attend training are not “guaranteed income programs” under the bill. Status: Enrolled. New bills: AB667/SB679 — Prohibiting law enforcement agency from accessing personal data without a warrant in exchange for payment Under current law, no law enforcement officer may identify or track the location of an individual’s communication device, such as a phone or another device that transmits communications, unless the law enforcement officer has a warrant or an exception applies such as for exigent circumstances or with consent of the owner. This bill prohibits a law enforcement agency from requesting, obtaining, or receiving access to any individual’s personal data in exchange for payment or a thing of value without a warrant. The bill creates the same exceptions to the prohibition for exigent circumstances or with consent of the owner. The bill defines “personal data” as information collected from or generated by an individual as part of a consumer transaction or as part of the use of a product or service, including billing information, demographic data, Internet search history, or use of applications. Status: Introduced in Assembly and Senate. Progressed since last update: AB207/SB205 — State referendum disclosure note Current law requires that each proposed constitutional amendment, contingent referendum, advisory referendum, or other proposal requiring a statewide referendum that is passed by the legislature include a complete statement of the ballot question to be voted on at the referendum. The ballot question may not be worded in such a manner as to require a negative vote to approve a proposition or an affirmative vote to disapprove a proposition. Also under current law, the attorney general must prepare an explanatory statement for each proposed constitutional amendment or other statewide referendum describing the effect of either a “yes” or “no” vote on each ballot question. This bill eliminates the requirement that the attorney general prepare such an explanatory statement. Instead, the bill requires that each proposal for a constitutional amendment or other statewide referendum that passes both houses of the legislature contain a complete state referendum disclosure notice that includes all of the following: 1. The date of the referendum. 2. The entire text of the ballot question and proposed constitutional amendment or enactment, if any. 3. To the extent applicable, a plain language summary of current law. 4. An explanation in plain language of the effect of the proposed constitutional amendment or other statewide referendum. 5. An explanation in plain language of the effect of a “yes” vote and the effect of a “no” vote. Under the bill, the content under items 3 to 5 combined may not exceed one page on paper not less than 8 1/2 inches by 11 inches and printed in at least 12-point font. Under the bill, the complete state referendum disclosure notice agreed to by both houses of the legislature must be included in the type C notice entitled “Notice of Referendum” that each county clerk must provide prior to any referendum. Current law requires that the text of the type C notice be posted at polling places on election day in such a manner as to be readily observed by voters entering the polling place or waiting in line to vote. As such, the complete state referendum disclosure notice must be so posted at the polls on election day. Additionally, for at least 30 days prior to the date of a statewide referendum, the complete state referendum disclosure notice must be published by the Elections Commission on the website used for voter registration, currently titled MyVote Wisconsin, or other voter public access website maintained by the commission and must be posted by each county clerk at the county clerk’s office and published by the county clerk on the county clerk’s website. Finally, the notice must be included with absentee ballots provided to voters for voting in a statewide referendum. Status: Passed in the Assembly; public hearing held in the Senate. SB188/AB188 — Reduction of penalty surcharge when certain fines or forfeitures are reduced Under current law, when a court imposes a fine or forfeiture for certain violations of state law or municipal or county ordinances, a penalty surcharge in the amount of 26 percent of the amount of the fine or forfeiture is also imposed. Current law provides that when a fine or forfeiture is suspended in whole or in part, the penalty surcharge must be reduced in proportion to the suspension. This bill requires the same rule to be applied for reduction of a fine or forfeiture. Under the bill, when a fine or forfeiture to which the penalty surcharge applies is reduced, the penalty surcharge must also be reduced in proportion to the reduction. Status: Passed in the Assembly; public hearing held in the Senate. SB270/AB268 — Right of appeal regarding decisions of the Wisconsin Elections Commission concerning the conduct of election officials Current law authorizes any complainant who is aggrieved by an order of WEC on the complaint to appeal the commission’s decision in court. The law does not specifically define the term “aggrieved” for purposes of this right of appeal. However, in Brown v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, the Wisconsin Supreme Court held that a complainant not receiving a favorable decision from the Elections Commission on a complaint is aggrieved, and therefore has a right to appeal that decision in court, only if the complainant has suffered an injury to a legally recognized interest as a result of the decision. This bill provides that a complainant must be considered aggrieved for purposes of that right of appeal regardless of whether the complainant has suffered an injury to a legally recognized interest and that a complainant may appeal any commission order that dismisses the complaint or otherwise does not grant the relief requested in the complaint. Status: Passed in the Assembly; passed through committee in Senate and available for scheduling a full Senate vote. SB432/AB412 — Mandatory reporting requirements and referring cases of suspected child abuse to law enforcement Under current law, certain individuals are required to report suspected child abuse or neglect to the county child welfare department or to the police if the individual has reasonable cause to suspect that a child seen by the individual in the course of professional duties has been abused or neglected or has been threatened with abuse or neglect (mandatory reporter). Generally, if a report is for threatened or suspected child sexual abuse or trafficking, the child welfare department must within 12 hours refer the case to the police. A child welfare department is required to adopt a written policy regarding how it refers to police reports of other forms of threatened or suspected child abuse or neglect, but it is not required by law to refer such cases to police. This bill requires a child welfare department generally to refer to police all reports of threatened or suspected abuse. Status: Passed in the Senate; referred to committee in Assembly. SB448/AB447 — Use of videoconferencing technology in certain civil actions* Under current law, a circuit court generally may allow the use of videoconferencing technology during pretrial, trial or fact-finding, or post-trial proceedings, subject to certain technical standards and criteria. However, current law provides that a defendant in a criminal case (defendant) or a respondent in certain civil actions that could result in loss of liberty or fundamental rights with respect to the respondent’s children (respondent) is entitled to be physically present in the courtroom during his or her trial and at his or her sentencing or other dispositional hearing. Currently, if a defendant or respondent objects to the use of videoconferencing technology regarding a proceeding that the defendant or respondent has a right to attend in person, the court must sustain the objection. If a defendant or respondent objects to the use of videoconferencing technology regarding any other proceeding, current law allows the court to exercise its discretion in determining the objection. This bill establishes a new exception to provide that, for objections by a respondent relating to the testimony of an expert witness by videoconference technology in matters relating to certain admissions, placements, or commitments, including for involuntary commitment and protective placement proceedings, even if a respondent is entitled to attend the proceeding in person, the court may exercise its discretion in determining the objection. Status: Passed in the Senate; public hearing held in the Assembly. SB459/AB458 — Admissibility of expert witnesses This bill updates the current statutory rule of evidence relating to testimony by experts to conform with recent changes made to Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 702 intended to clarify the court’s gatekeeping role with respect to expert testimony. Current law parallels FRE 702 prior to its amendment, allowing the testimony of an expert witness if the witness’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact at issue in the case, but limiting the testimony of an expert witness to testimony that is based on sufficient facts or data, that is the product of reliable principles and methods, and that is based on the witness applying those principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. Similar to the changes made to FRE 702, the bill confirms that the proponent of the testimony is required to demonstrate to the court that it is more likely than not that the witness’s testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, that it is the product of reliable principles and methods, and, finally, that the witness’s opinion reflects a reliable application of those principles and methods to the facts of the case. Status: Passed in the Senate; public hearing held in the Assembly.  Milwaukee City Hall. Photograph by Alexandria Staubach. By Alexandria Staubach
A large settlement moved one step closer to resolving claims of Milwaukee police misconduct, following a recommendation Monday by the city’s Judiciary and Legislation Committee. Meanwhile, while another city committee recommended a pay increase for officers. The Judiciary and Legislation Committee approved a budget-breaking $2.5 million settlement with the family of Keishon Thomas. Thomas died of an overdose in police custody in 2022, after officers failed to render care. That case has been the source of legal trouble for years. The family filed suit in Milwaukee County Circuit Court in February. Taxpayers would foot the bill for officers' inaction because the city of Milwaukee is self-insured. The proposed settlement now passes to the Common Council for approval. The payment would be among the most expensive in recent memory but for a $7 million payout to Danny Wilber in May. Wilber’s conviction was overturned after a federal appeals court found police misconduct resulted in an unfair trial. Wilber served 18 years in prison on the case. The committee also considered payment of $180,000 to Sedric Smith to resolve a federal case alleging constitutional violations by MPD officers. In a letter to the Milwaukee Common Council discussing the proposed settlement with Smith, City Attorney Evan Goyke and Deputy City Attorney Naomi Sanders wrote that “(s)ettlement is in the City’s best interest.” The committee postponed any recommendation on that settlement, however. Smith, who worked for a private security company at Ascension Columbia St. Mary’s Hospital, was stabbed by Edgar Padilla in early 2024. Prior to the stabbing, Padilla had launched himself and hurled racially charged insults at Smith inside the hospital’s parking structure. Smith, with the help of other private security officers, detained Padilla. According to court documents, Smith transferred Padilla to MPD custody as Padilla continued to “yell obscenities and engage in threatening behavior.” Smith then returned to patrolling the Columbia St. Mary’s emergency room. Officers Justin Arredondo and Jeremy A. Weber searched Padilla and located a knife in his backpack. The officers then called an ambulance to transfer Padilla to an emergency room. Neither officer secured or seized the knife before releasing Padilla to the ambulance, the complaint alleges. Neither officer accompanied Padilla to the emergency room at Columbia St. Mary’s, either. At the Columbia St. Mary's ER, Padilla was released into the care of the hospital “without police escort or order and with all of his belongings, including the knife,” the complaint states. Less than an hour later, Padilla stabbed Smith several times in the ER’s public restroom. While the 2025 budget originally proposed $3.5 million in allocations for settlements, ultimately only $1.9 million was approved. Since April, the Common Council has filled that gap by moving at least $3.8 million from the Common Council’s contingency fund to the damages and claims fund, and, for Wilber’s settlement, by using contingent borrowing. Contingent borrowing is a form of short-term, unplanned borrowing that was not anticipated in the year’s original budget. While the Judiciary and Legislative Committee was recommending the large settlement for the Thomas case, the city’s Finance and Personnel Committee at a simultaneous meeting recommended a resolution to ratify a final agreement between the city and the MPD that includes a 15% increase in pay for MPD officers. That resolution, now moving to the Common Council, takes the city and MPD one step closer to ending a nearly three-year battle over a contract predicted to require $51 million in additional salary funding to the department. Nov. 20 Note: This post has been corrected to reflect that the Judiciary and Legislative Committee postponed any vote on whether to recommend the Smith settlement to the Common Council.  The Wisconsin State Capitol. Photograph by Margo Kirchner. By Alexandria Staubach
A bill that could ensure continuity of care for those returning to the community from incarceration is moving at breakneck speed though the Legislature, as lawmakers scramble to catch up with other states having similar legislation already in place. The bill, AB604/SB598 was introduced in the Assembly Oct. 29 and in the Senate the following day. In just two weeks it passed through a committee in the Senate and had a public hearing in the Assembly’s Committee on Mental Health and Substance Abuse Prevention. Contrary to the speed with which the legislation is moving, the bill won’t benefit incarcerated Wisconsinites quite as quickly. The bill would require the Wisconsin Department of Health Services to submit by Jan. 1, 2027 a request to the federal Department of Health and Human services for waiver of federal Medicaid law to allow coverage for certain care prior to an individual’s release from prison. An imprisoned individual could then receive case management services and medication-assisted treatment for substance-use disorders during the 90 days before release, plus a 30-day supply of prescription medications for use after release. Under current law, individuals can apply for Medicaid coverage while incarcerated, but they are not actually enrolled until their release date. The proposed changes would not change who is eligible; they instead would move up the coverage date for certain care to shortly before release. “In rural areas, it can take weeks to see a primary care provider for medications and months to get behavioral services,” wrote the Wisconsin Counties Association in support of the bill. “When individuals are released without any support, outcomes are often poor,” the organization said. With a waiver in place, the state would receive reimbursement under the Medicaid program during the 90-day prerelease window. Without the waiver, the cost for any such medical services before release falls entirely on state and local governments. Written testimony from DHS suggests that a successful application for the federal funds would provide a “smoother care transition for incarcerated individuals,” and that prerelease coverage could reduce other Medicaid care costs, such as for inpatient stays. The Medical College of Wisconsin called the bill “a critical step toward improving health outcomes for a vulnerable population and reducing the burden on state and local governments.” “Nearly two-thirds of sentenced people in jails and 58 percent of those in state prison meet the clinical criteria for a substance abuse disorder, compared to just five percent of the general population,” wrote sponsor Rep. Clint P. Moses (R-Menomonie) in favor of the bill. He noted that “people leaving correctional facilities face up to a 40 times higher risk of overdose death within the first two weeks after release.” Gaps in care after release “contribute to recidivism, overdoses, and higher costs to taxpayers,” he said. “The savings generated through this federal match could be reinvested to expand treatment services and further reduce the financial burden on Wisconsin taxpayers,” Moses said. Nineteen other states have already enrolled in this federal matching program, which was introduced in 2023. States have to pass legislation permitting the waiver application.  Lovern. Photograph from the Milwaukee County website. By Alexandria Staubach Milwaukee County District Attorney Kent Lovern has responded to the State Public Defenders office accusation that his office is too close to community advocacy group Enough is Enough. Lovern defended his office’s interactions with the advocacy group in a letter sent last week to Chief Judge Carl Ashley. Lovern’s letter addressed the claim by attorneys in the SPD’s office that Enough is Enough’s “activities and formation have been closely coordinated with the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s office since its inception,” and that the group “should not be regarded as an independent grass roots organization.” Lovern told Ashley that “the District Attorney’s Office has provided an appropriate level of assistance to allow a community group to better understand and access the Milwaukee County criminal justice system.” He said his office provided support “with the spirit of facilitating greater access of community members to the important workings of its local government institutions, while maintaining the ethical tenets that govern our advocacy.” Enough is Enough initially reached out to Lovern in early 2024, after he announced he was running for district attorney, he said. The group shared their plans to serve as “a court watch entity to gather information about prosecution and sentencing practices.” After Lovern met with the nascent nonprofit group, he “indicated (his) general belief that more public engagement with our criminal justice system is always welcome.” He told Ashley it is important for the public to see “the difficulty of the work done on a daily basis” by government accountable to the community. Lovern told Ashley that after meeting with Enough is Enough, he asked Assistant District Attorney Joy Hammond to aid the group in its early efforts to understand the criminal justice system. Hammond then asked retired Assistant District Attorney Tom Potter to help. The SPD attorneys claimed that Hammond and Potter were particularly involved in the group’s initial formation. Lovern described Hammond as one of eight community prosecutors whose primary function is connecting community members with other institutions in Milwaukee County. Lovern said Hammond attended a few meetings with Enough is Enough over the course of a year. She also provided a courthouse tour for the group, met with a sitting judge and Enough is Enough in the courthouse cafeteria, and attended an off-site community event held by the group. Potter helped the group learn the Wisconsin Circuit Court Access Program (CCAP). Lovern found the most concerning assertion in the SPD letter to be the alleged editing by individuals related to the DA’s office of Enough is Enough communications to the judiciary. Lovern conceded that Potter helped edit a letter of introduction from the group to Ashley, but noted that Potter’s edits included a suggestion to “clearly establish the independence of (Enough is Enough) from the District Attorney’s Office.” Hammond contributed to a letter Enough is Enough intended to distribute to the community. “Hammond wrote four suggested paragraphs,” said Lovern. While he had not seen everything produced by the group, “I have not seen . . . writing that substantially contains the paragraphs written by Hammond,” he said. “There is no evidence that any member of the District Attorney’s Office has edited other (Enough is Enough) submissions to the Judiciary at large,” Lovern told Ashley. He said his office had not participated in “any community impact statements submitted to the courts” by Enough is Enough. Lovern listed two dozen other organizations with which his office has regular contact and said that Enough is Enough “is now one of those groups.” Lovern wrote that his office did provide Enough is Enough with copies of criminal complaints as the group got on its feet and learned how to navigate CCAP. Those “are obviously public documents,” he said, adding that his office’s assistance was “consistent with every other member of the public, including the media, who requests a copy.” A shared Dropbox folder in which fewer than 20 complaints were placed was used for several days. “There is no attempt to obfuscate the engagement (Enough is Enough) has with this office,” Lovern said. He highlighted that “SPD made special mention” that Enough is Enough intended to share its findings with the press, local leaders, and legislators. “This is precisely the function of court watch groups,” Lovern wrote.
The Wisconsin Senate (left) and Assembly chambers on Sept. 19, 2025. Photographs by Margo Kirchner. By Alexandria Staubach
The Legislature recently ended another busy floor period, having moved forward several bills with implications for the criminal justice system. Meanwhile, two criminal justice bills were enacted into law since our last update, while another two were vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers. Big bills have been introduced regarding legalization of medical marijuana and regulation of cannabis products that have proliferated under the Farm Bill of 2018. The Legislature is rushing to discuss a constitutional amendment that provides “the right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable and fundamental individual right that shall never be infringed.” Culture-war issues like banning guaranteed income—a sister to universal income geared toward low-income individuals—and codifying English as the official language of the state are also progressing. All summaries below are quotes from the analysis provided by the Legislative Reference Bureau unless italicized (WJI’s additions). The titles are WJI’s summaries of the often lengthy and sometimes misleading titles provided by the bills' authors. When the bills in the Assembly and Senate are generally the same, WJI links to just one. An asterisk * denotes a bill substantially similar to one introduced in a previous session but which either failed to pass or was vetoed by the governor. For a refresher on the lifecycle of a bill, you can find that here. The rough progression of a successful bill is: introduction → referral to committee → passage by committee → vote by full chamber → transfer to the other chamber to go through the prior three steps there, too → to the governor for signature. The vetoed AB34/SB25 — Court-issued criminal complaints (John Doe prosecutions)* Under current law, a district attorney has the discretion as to whether or not to issue a complaint to charge a person with a crime. Current law also provides that, if a district attorney refuses to issue a complaint against a person, a judge may conduct a hearing to determine if there is probable cause to believe that the person committed a crime and, if so, issue a complaint. Under this bill, when there is an officer-involved death, which is a death that results directly from an action or an omission of a law enforcement officer, and the district attorney determined there was no basis to prosecute the officer, a court may not issue a complaint against the involved officer unless there is new or unused evidence presented. Status: Vetoed. AB66/SB76 -- Dismissing or amending certain criminal charges and deferred prosecution agreements* Under current law, a prosecutor may dismiss or amend a criminal charge without approval from the court. Under this bill, a prosecutor must get the court’s approval to dismiss or amend a charge if the charge is for any of the following: 1) a crime of domestic abuse or a violation of a domestic violence temporary restraining order or injunction; 2) theft of an automobile; 3) a crime of abuse of an individual at risk or a violation of an individual-at-risk TRO or injunction; 4) first-degree, second-degree, or third-degree sexual assault; 5) a crime against a child; 6) illegal possession of a firearm if the person has been convicted of, adjudicated delinquent for, or found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect of, committing, soliciting, conspiring, or attempting to commit a violent felony, as defined under current law; or 7) reckless driving that results in great bodily harm. The court may approve the dismissal or amendment of such a charge only if the court finds the action is consistent with the public’s interest in deterring the commission of these crimes and with the legislature’s intent, expressed in this bill, to vigorously prosecute individuals who commit these crimes. If the court approves any dismissal or amendment in a year, the court must submit an annual report to the legislature detailing each approval…. Status: Vetoed. The introed SB534/AB547 — Medical marijuana This bill creates a program that allows a registered patient to possess and use medical cannabis products; allows designated caregivers to possess medical cannabis products on behalf of registered patients; licenses and regulates medical cannabis growers, processors, and testing laboratories; and licenses and regulates dispensaries that sell medical cannabis products. No person may possess, sell, transfer, or transport cannabis or medical cannabis products unless the person is licensed or registered as provided in the bill. Under the bill, “medical cannabis products” includes products in the form of concentrates, oils, tinctures, edibles, pills, topical forms, gels, creams, vapors, patches, liquids, and forms administered by a nebulizer but excludes cannabis in a form that can be smoked. The bill adds medical cannabis to certain provisions under the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) and eliminates the sunset of certain requirements under the PDMP. Status: Public hearing held in the Senate, referred to committee in Assembly. AB606 — Regulation of hemp-derived cannabis This bill regulates hemp-derived cannabinoid products in the same manner as alcohol beverages are regulated under current law and renames the Division of Alcohol Beverages in the Department of Revenue as the Division of Intoxicating Products (division). The bill also makes minor changes relating to alcohol beverage warehouses and alcohol beverage production arrangements. Status: Public hearing held in Assembly, no Senate bill introduced. SB202/AB165 -- Guaranteed income prohibition This bill prohibits a political subdivision from expending moneys of the political subdivision for the purpose of making payments to individuals under a guaranteed income program. “Guaranteed income program” is defined under the bill to mean a program under which individuals are provided with regular periodic cash payments that are unearned and that may be used for any purpose. Programs under which an individual is required to perform work or attend training are not “guaranteed income programs” under the bill. Status: Passed in the Assembly, public hearing held in Senate. SJR105/AJR112 -- Constitutional amendment providing right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable right without qualification Currently, the Wisconsin Constitution guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation, or any other lawful purpose. This constitutional amendment, proposed to the 2025 legislature on first consideration, guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms without qualification. The amendment further provides that the right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable and fundamental individual right that shall never be infringed. Finally, under the amendment, any restriction on the right to keep and bear arms shall be subject to strict scrutiny. Strict scrutiny is a standard of judicial review of government limitations on fundamental rights that generally provides that such a limitation is valid and enforceable only if it is necessary to achieve a compelling state interest, if it is narrowly tailored to its purpose, and if no reasonable less restrictive alternative exists. Status: Public hearing held in Senate. The in-between SB459/AB458 -- Admissibility of expert witnesses This bill updates the current statutory rule of evidence relating to testimony by experts to conform with recent changes made to Federal Rule of Evidence (FRE) 702 intended to clarify the court’s gatekeeping role with respect to expert testimony. Current law parallels FRE 702 prior to its amendment, allowing the testimony of an expert witness if the witness’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact at issue in the case, but limiting the testimony of an expert witness to testimony that is based on sufficient facts or data, that is the product of reliable principles and methods, and that is based on the witness applying those principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case. Similar to the changes made to FRE 702, the bill confirms that the proponent of the testimony is required to demonstrate to the court that it is more likely than not that the witness’s testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, that it is the product of reliable principles and methods, and, finally, that the witness’s opinion reflects a reliable application of those principles and methods to the facts of the case. Status: Public hearing has been held in both Senate and Assembly. AB24/SB57 — County sheriff assistance with certain federal immigration functions This bill requires sheriffs to request proof of legal presence status from individuals held in a county jail for an offense punishable as a felony. The bill also requires sheriffs to comply with detainers and administrative warrants received from the federal department of homeland security regarding individuals held in the county jail for a criminal offense. Under the bill, sheriffs must annually certify to the Department of Revenue that they have complied with each of these requirements. If a sheriff fails to provide such a certification, DOR must reduce the county’s shared revenue payments for the next year by 15 percent. The bill also requires sheriffs to maintain a record of the number of individuals from whom proof of legal presence is requested who are verified as unlawfully present in this state and a list of the types of crimes for which those individuals were confined in the jail. The information must be provided to the Department of Justice upon request, and DOJ must compile the information and submit a report to the legislature. Status: Passed in the Assembly; passed through committee in Senate and available for scheduling a full Senate vote. AB377/SB357 — Recognizing English as the official language of Wisconsin Currently, Wisconsin has no official language. This bill provides that the official language of this state is English. The bill also allows any state or local governmental entity to provide a person with access to artificial intelligence or other machine-assisted translation tools in lieu of appointing an English language interpreter if the entity is authorized or required by law to appoint an interpreter for the person. Additionally, the bill provides that, unless otherwise specifically required by law, all oral and written communication by all state and local governmental entities must be in the English language, except that such communication may be in another language when appropriate to the circumstances of an individual case, the implementation of a program in a specific instance, or the discharge of a responsibility in a particular situation. The bill also permits state and local government officers and employees to use a language other than English in oral or written communication whenever necessary for one or more of eight specified purposes. Finally, the bill precludes any state or local governmental entity from prohibiting any person from becoming proficient in any language or restricting the oral or written use of any language for a nongovernmental purpose. Status: Public hearing held in Assembly. AB89/SB92 — Retail theft enhanced penalties Under current law, the penalty for the crime of property theft varies by the value of the property taken…. Similarly, the penalty for the crime of retail theft varies by the value of the merchandise or service that is taken…. This bill specifies that, if, in a six-month period, a defendant commits more than one violation of property theft or more than one violation of retail theft, the value of items taken at each violation may be aggregated and the crimes may be prosecuted as one property theft crime or one retail theft crime. The penalty for the crime would be determined by the aggregated value of the items taken. Creates a new crime. Status: Passed in the Assembly; passed through committee in Senate and available for scheduling a full Senate vote. Newly enacted laws: AB77/SB66 — Registration plate concealment devices penalty Under current law, any motor vehicle for which the Department of Transportation has issued registration plates must display those plates, along with any decals issued for the plates. This bill prohibits the possession, sale, purchase, installation, and use of a registration plate concealment device, which is a manual, electronic, or mechanical device designed or adapted to be installed on a motor vehicle to 1) switch between two or more registration plates; 2) move, obstruct, or conceal a registration plate; or 3) alter the appearance of a registration plate so that the registration number cannot be seen and read. The bill also prohibits the equipment of any motor vehicle with a registration plate concealment device. A person who violates these prohibitions may be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than 90 days, or both. Any vehicle equipped in violation of these prohibitions may be impounded, and reasonable costs for towing and impounding the vehicle may be assessed against the owner. Creates a new crime. Status: Enacted into law. AB75/SB115 — DOJ collection and reporting of certain criminal case data* This bill requires state DOJ to collect from the director of state courts all of the following information for each criminal case: 1) the county in which the case was filed; 2) the name of the prosecuting attorney assigned to the case; 3) the name of the court official assigned to the case; 4) the criminal charge filed; 5) the charging recommendation from the referring law enforcement agency, if applicable; 6) for each case, whether the court released the defendant without bail, upon the execution of an unsecured appearance bond, upon the execution of an appearance bond with sufficient solvent sureties, or upon the deposit of cash in lieu of sureties, or denied release, and the name of the court official who made the decision; 7) for each case for which a court required the execution of an appearance bond with sufficient solvent sureties, the monetary amount of the bond and the name of the court official who made the decision; 8) for each case for which a court required the deposit of cash in lieu of sureties, the monetary amount of cash required and the name of the court official who made the decision; 9) any other conditions of release imposed on the defendant and the name of the court official who made the decision; 10) whether any plea bargain was offered in the case; 11) whether a deferred prosecution agreement was offered in the case; 12) whether any charge relating to the case was dismissed; and 13) whether the case resulted in a conviction. Status: Enacted into law.  Attorney Calvin Duncan (right) talks at Marquette University Law School on Nov. 5, 2025, with the Lubar Center's Derek Mosley. Photograph by Margo Kirchner. By Margo Kirchner Calvin Duncan, author of The Jailhouse Lawyer, told law students and community members about inequalities in Louisiana’s criminal legal system and the numerous barriers faced by those in prison to establish innocence or prove constitutional violations. Legal roadblocks for those incarcerated include the lack of appointed counsel after completion of an appeal and great difficulty in obtaining court and other records. Now out of custody and an attorney, Duncan helps those incarcerated research and litigate their cases, and he is running for election as a court clerk with the intent to make records more easily obtainable. Duncan recounted his story as jailhouse lawyer to licensed attorney in a discussion at Marquette University Law School with Derek Mosley, director of the Lubar Center for Public Policy Research and Civic Education. Along the way in his career, Duncan helped change laws in Louisiana and Oregon that allowed nonunanimous juries to convict a defendant. At the time of Duncan's conviction, agreement by 10 of 12 jurors was sufficient for conviction. Duncan told the crowd that documentation showed the Louisiana rule was created to preserve white supremacy by making the votes of one or two Black jurors irrelevant. In Ramos v. Louisiana (2020), the U.S. Supreme Court found that the right to a jury trial in the Sixth Amendment requires a unanimous verdict to convict a defendant of a serious crime. Duncan, not then a lawyer himself, worked with attorneys on the case. Duncan stressed for Marquette’s law students that law schools provide “knowledge of the law and how to wield it.” He emphasized that half of the Bill of Rights protects people accused of crime, and that more people need to defend the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth amendments and protect those who cannot protect themselves. Duncan spent more than two decades in prison for a murder he says he did not commit. He told the crowd that from the start of his time in custody, he focused on learning the law and helping his fellow residents with their legal matters. Immediately after his release in 2011, based on a new plea agreement, Duncan set his sights on becoming an attorney. Duncan was just a teen and had moved from Louisiana to Oregon to work when he heard from a relative that police wanted to arrest him for murder. Duncan said he did not know what the matter was about. Although he had committed some shoplifting as a troubled younger teen in New Orleans following years of abuse as a child, he had not been involved in any homicide. Two detectives found him in Oregon and arrested him. Duncan told the audience that he did not meet his attorneys until the day before trial. The prosecutor wanted the death penalty, but the jury disagreed and gave him life instead. He was sent to the Louisiana State Penitentiary, known as Angola. Incarcerated with men on death row, Duncan decided to learn the law, he said. Angola had a program to train “inmate counsel substitutes,” who could do most everything that lawyers could do except go outside the prison to conduct investigations. His girlfriend sent him copies of cases, while he created his own law book comprising newspaper articles that discussed the law. He joked that he “always enjoyed when wealthy people got arrested,” because the newspaper stories about them would include discussion of the law. As an inmate counsel substitute, Duncan wrote letters to obtain court and law enforcement records. He often was unsuccessful until Louisiana law changed in the 1980s to allow access to police reports and district attorney files. However, the requestor had to pay for the records. Duncan said he donated plasma about twice per week to raise money to pay for records. The Orleans Parish court clerk in particular was difficult to get records from. Other parishes were more cooperative. Duncan maintained his innocence for more than 20 years. He obtained his release after the prosecutor in 2011 allowed him to plead guilty to the lesser crime of manslaughter. Duncan said he lied to the court and admitted the killing just to get out. Duncan said that within a week of release, he was at Tulane Law School asking how to attend. It was news to him that he needed to get an undergraduate degree first. He then attended Tulane and received his paralegal certificate and bachelor’s degree. He made it into his first choice of law school: Lewis & Clark, in Oregon. He said the first line of his application read, “I am so tired of illegally practicing law.” Duncan was exonerated during his second year of law school. He said the officers who interrogated him had been investigated for corruption and altering evidence, and notes in the prosecutor’s file showed that a photo array shown to a witness included two white men (Duncan is Black). Meanwhile, Louisiana passed a law allowing evidence of innocence to be presented to a judge, even in old cases. Duncan’s attorney from years before helped present Duncan’s case to a judge in 2021, and the judge and prosecutor reopened his case and dismissed it. Duncan said that when he applied for compensation for wrongful conviction, the Louisiana attorney general said she would prosecute him for perjury for lying to the judge at his 2011 plea hearing if he pursued it. He dropped the request. After graduating from law school in 2023, Duncan founded The Light of Justice, a program helping people in prison with their cases. He also decided to run to replace that New Orleans clerk of criminal court. Duncan said his opponent, backed by the attorney general, argues that he is a convicted murderer. But a prosecutor has “stepped up” and said he was exonerated. Debates have been heated. Duncan’s talk was sponsored by the Lubar Center as well as Marquette Law School’s Andrew Center for Restorative Justice and Public Interest Law Society. The Jailhouse Lawyer, co-authored by Duncan and criminal justice reform advocate Sophie Cull, was published in July 2025.  By Alexandria Staubach Menus recently obtained by Wisconsin Justice Initiative for Green Bay Correctional Institution show a diet dominated by ultra-processed foods high in carbohydrates, fat, and sugar, raising concerns about chronic illnesses and the health of those held in Wisconsin’s prisons. WJI enlisted University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Professor Renee Scampini, director of the school’s undergraduate public health program, to evaluate menus WJI obtained through an open records request. The Department of Corrections provided menus from GBCI for a sample week in January 2025. The menus included a general menu plus some specialty menus for those needing halal, kosher, soft food, or other diets. Scampini looked most closely at the general menu.  Scampini. Photograph from the UW–Milwaukee website. “This overall diet makes for high total fat content, added sugar content and other cardiac/cancer concerns,” Scampini opined. Taken at face value, the menus indicate incarcerated individuals are provided with an average of 2,689 calories a day if they eat everything provided. That amount is consistent with recommendations from “The Merck Manual” for sedentary adult males, ages 19 to 60. “This menu looks like it was specifically written to meet an institutional standard of the U.S. dietary requirements,” Scampini told WJI. The calories based on serving size provided in the DOC menus are “probably close to correct,” she said. But she added that how “that actually meshes with what's eaten/tolerated is questionable." As an example, Scampini pointed out that satisfaction of protein goals was primarily met though milk—a questionable practice as many U.S. adults are lactose intolerant. Scampini said this intolerance is even more prevalent in minority groups, particularly Asian American, African American, and Native American populations. “This is the same practice that most U.S. schools use because they contract out dietary services,” said Scampini. The practice yields a “massive industry of processed prepared (e.g., heat-and-eat) foods that ‘match’ U.S. dietary guidelines,” she said. “Whole grains, fruit, and vegetable goals are woefully low, which also makes fiber low,” Scampini told WJI. She also said that other nutrient needs, such as vitamins and minerals, were likely being met through fortified and enriched processed foods like cereals and muffins. Scampini’s concerns are consistent with insights from inside GBCI. An anonymous resident there told WJI that breakfast was “strictly dry cereal and bread that at times is old.” The same source told WJI that for a while the lunches and dinners during the weekend were a “bag meal which consisted of basically nothing but junk food and/or old (Un)Crustable peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.” Scampini hypothesized, based on her time spent in industrial kitchens, that animal-based products in the DOC diet may also be ultra-processed. “For example, chicken is often a reconstituted meat of chicken plus fillers/stabilizers for moisture/easy preparation,” she said. Scampini conservatively estimated that 75% to 83% of calories provided by DOC come from ultra-processed foods. That number that could be higher, as she assumed for her calculations that all fruits and vegetables listed on the menu were fresh, which she told WJI was “highly unlikely.” According to Scampini, the long-term concerns associated with eating an ultra-processed diet stem from its effects on the metabolism. In one multinational study, higher ultra-processed food consumption was associated with an increased risk of cancer and cardiometabolic diseases.  A table showing Scampini's calculations of total unprocessed and total ultra-processed calories for each day of the sample GBCI menu. The menu’s calorie count presumes that a prison resident eats or drinks everything, including all of the ketchup, mustard, mayonnaise, sugar packets, and milk provided. For those who are lactose intolerant, do not eat every condiment, or are tired of Uncrustable sandwiches and chips, the calorie intake will be less. There “hasn’t been a meal I’ve had in a while that was fulfilling or even warm to enjoy, which causes me not to even want to eat it, but since I’m not that fortunate to have canteen, I partake in what I can to survive,” the GBCI resident said. Even if an individual has funds to buy items at the canteen, several food items there are also ultra-processed.  The menu at Green Bay Correctional Institution from Jan. 5-11, 2025, provided by the Wisconsin Department of Corrections in response to Wisconsin Justice Initiative's open records request. |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|
RSS Feed