Evers' judges: Angeline E. Winton

​​​"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.

Photo by Lesa Ann Molitor from the Spooner Advocate.

Name: Angeline E. Winton
 
Appointed to: Washburn County Circuit Court
 
Appointment date: Aug. 13, 2019 (elected in April 2020 to term ending 2026)
 
Education:
Law School – William Mitchell College of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota
Undergraduate – University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire
High School – Hayward High, Hayward, Wisconsin
 
Recent legal employment:
January 2017-present – District attorney, Washburn County
January 2009-December 2016 – Half-time shared assistant district attorney for both Burnett and Washburn counties
October 2008-December 2016 – Self-employed attorney, Angeline E. Winton, Attorney at Law, Hayward, Wisconsin
October 2008-December 2016 – Associate, Winton Law Offices, Hayward, Wisconsin
 
Bar and administrative memberships:
State Bar of Wisconsin
Lac Courte Oreilles Tribal Court, Hayward, Wisconsin
 
General character of practice:
Since January of 2017, I have served Washburn County as full time District Attorney. Focusing solely on criminal matters, my days are spent reviewing police reports, making charging decisions, attending Drug Court when scheduled, meeting with victims, reviewing files and/or meeting with defendants and defense attorneys to discuss settlement. Additionally, a significant part of my time is spent meeting with victims, preparing for contested hearings, writing legal briefs, appearing on behalf of the State in bond hearings, initial appearances, preliminary hearings, motion hearings, sentencing hearings, preparing for trial and trying jury trial cases.
 
From January 2009 to the end of December 2016, I served both Washburn County and Burnett County in the capacity as their half-time shared Assistant District Attorney. The other half of my time was spent running a successful private practice in Hayward, Wisconsin, working in the family firm alongside my father, Ward Wm. Winton. In this capacity I handled a wide variety of civil matters and municipal prosecutions as Municipal Attorney for the Village of Siren in Burnett County and the Village of Birchwood in Sawyer County.
 
Describe typical clients:
Although not clients per se, as District Attorney I serve the people of Washburn County, and take that responsibility extremely seriously. With an overarching goal of protecting the community, I encourage rehabilitation of amenable, low-risk offenders such as with treatment of those struggling with drug addictions. When time allows, I have an open door policy and encourage victims, citizens and other interested parties to meet with me and share any special concerns they may have, or to provide me with information they believe is crucial to my role as District Attorney.
 
Until December of 2016, my civil private practice focused primarily on real estate, estate planning, guardian ad litem work, probate and family law. My
typical clients were honest, hardworking people who simply needed someone to guide them through the often confusing steps of the legal process.
 
Number of cases tried to verdict: At least 25 jury trials and countless court trials.
 
List up to five significant trials, appeals, or other legal matters in which you participated as a judge or lawyer in the past seven years:
 
State v. Brandon Scherz: Washburn County Case 16CF92/WI Court of Appeals Case 17AF730
This was a case that was initially charged by my predecessor, Thomas H. Frost as Second Degree Sexual Assault. When I took office in January of 2017, this case was set for trial on April 20, 2017.
 
Before trial, I filed a motion in limine indicating that I intended to use the defendant's confessions. On April 13, 2017, after a Miranda/Goodchild hearing on March 15, 2017, the Honorable Judge Eugene D. Harrington rendered his oral ruling, suppressing the defendant's confessions.
 
One of the hardest things I have had to do in my career is explain to the rape victim in this case that, in order to seek justice on her behalf, I needed to delay her case and fight to correct the Circuit Court's clear error in suppressing defendant's admissions. The victim was extremely reluctant as she wanted the stress of the trial to be over with, and we both knew seeking an appeal would mean many months of delay. Ultimately she found the strength to agree that a continuation was necessary to achieve justice in her case,
 
After lengthy discussions with the Wisconsin Attorney General's Office, in anticipation of the court's ruling, on April 13. 2017, I requested a continuance of the trial pending an interlocutory appeal. The Circuit Court denied that request and the Attorney General's Office sought and received an immediate stay of the Circuit Court proceedings on April 17, 2017, three days before the trial was to commence. On December 28, 2017, the Court of Appeals reversed the Circuit Court's ruling and remanded the case back for further proceedings. The State filed a substitution of the Honorable Eugene D. Harrington and the Honorable John P. Anderson was assigned to the case.
 
On March 14, 2018, a Petition for Review to the Wisconsin Supreme Court was denied.
 
With the defendant's confessions reinstated, the case proceeded to trial on 11/28/20l8. At trial, the case focused on the use of force. After consulting with the victim, 1 asked the court to include a lesser included instruction for Third Degree Sexual Assault. The defendant was then convicted by a jury of his peers of Third Degree Sexual Assault, Possession of THC, and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.
 
The victim was extremely happy with the outcome and this was one of my most satisfying days as District Attorney. After asking the victim to have faith in me and faith in the criminal justice system, she was ecstatic and told me she was so happy that I was her DA.
 
Shockingly, the Presentence Investigation came back with a probation recommendation. With the assistance of the victim's heartfelt victim impact statement, the State was able to convince the Honorable John P. Anderson that prison, rather than probation, was the appropriate response to Mr. Scherz' admitted rape of the victim. On February 6, 2019, Brandon Scherz was sentenced to five years imprisonment, bifurcated as two years of initial confinement, followed by three years of extended supervision.
 
This was a significant case in my career. I was happy to see, after the long battle through the Circuit Court, that the system worked and the Court of Appeals carefully, fairly and impartially applied the law to the facts and reinstated the defendant's confession, thereby helping me attain justice for the victim.
 
State v. Kelly Daniels: Washburn County Case 17CF89
This case involved three controlled methamphetamine buys from Kelly Daniels in February of 2017. After a lengthy 2 day jury trial in bitterly cold weather, Ms. Daniels was convicted on all three delivery counts. During trial, I played the audio from one of the controlled buys.
 
Having had the audio transcribed in advance, I was able to let the jury read along while listening to Ms. Daniel's voice as she sold methamphetamine to the confidential informant. I believe this played a significant role in the outcome of the case.
 
After she was convicted, although I argued the severity of Ms. Daniel's actions warranted a prison sentence, she ultimately received only an imposed and stayed prison term.
 
Despite the sentence, many in the community took notice that prosecution of this case was a priority for my office.
 
It is my hope that other drug dealers like Ms. Daniels will consider how vigorously my office prosecuted this case and will give a second thought before moving their operations into Washburn County.
 
State v. Steven Stone: Washburn County Circuit Court Case 14CF'88
This was an interesting case. Steven Stone was charged with Count I - OWI-5th, Count 2- Operating After Revocation and Count 3, PAC-5th. My involvement first began when, as assistant district attorney, I second-chaired the jury trial on January 22, 2015 with then District Attorney Thomas H. Frost.
 
During District Attorney Frost's direct questioning of Deputy Josh Christman, Mr. Frost unintentionally provoked a mistrial when Deputy Christman commented on the defendant's prior OWI-4th conviction in violation of the trial court's pretrial ruling.
 
After a ruling from the Court of Appeals, the State was permitted to retry the case.
 
Although I was only working one day per week at that time for Washburn County in my capacity as Assistant District Attorney, when asked by District Attorney Frost, I agreed to retry the case alone. I did so on October 5, 20I6 and successfully obtained convictions on all three counts.
 
Although I didn't handle the sentencing, I understand that the defendant was ultimately placed on probation and ordered to serve 330 days conditional jail time on Count I, OW1-5th, consecutive to 120 days conditional jail time on Count 2, OAR.
 
Winton’s application included discussion of two additional cases, which WJI has not included due to length.
 
Experience in adversary proceedings before administrative bodies:
For approximately a year prior to being elected District Attorney in 2017, I was appointed to serve as Sawyer County's Condemnation Commissioner. During my tenure I was never called upon to serve but stood ready to do so.
 
Describe your non-litigation experience (e.g., arbitration, mediation).
From 2008 to 2016, in my civil practice, I handled a variety of real estate matters and estate planning cases which focused primarily on drafting documents and advising clients, rather than litigation. During this time, as guardian ad litem in family law cases, I also frequently engaged in informal mediation with the parties in an attempt to reach a result consistent with the best interests of the children.
 
Position or involvement in judicial, non-partisan, or partisan political campaign, committee, or organization:
Since approximately 2000, I have volunteered to various degrees either by making phone calls, door-knocking, etc. for each U.S. presidential democratic party campaign.
 
Prior to going to law school in 2005, for approximately a year I served as the President of the Sawyer County Democratic Party in Hayward, Wisconsin.
 
Previous runs for public office:
Washburn County District Attorney, elected November 2016
 
All judicial or non-partisan candidates endorsed in the last ten years:
Chief Judge Lisa Neubauer, in 2018 and 2019 for April 2019 Supreme Court election
Dane County Circuit Judge Jill Karofsky, in 2019 for April 2020 Supreme Court election
 
 
Professional or civic and charitable organizations:
Washburn, Sawyer & Rusk Tri-County Bar Association, 2008-present, president 2011
Spooner Lions Club, volunteer, 2015-present
Spooner Rodeo Committee, volunteer-Rodeo, 2015-present
Northwoods Humane Society, volunteer, sporadically from 2001-present
 
Significant pro bono legal work or volunteer service:
I volunteer for various organizations in my community when able but due to the nature of my restricted duties as District Attorney, I do not have significant pro bono legal work.
 
Quotes:
 
Why I want to be a judge:
I have served the citizens of Washburn County as a prosecutor for over ten years, yet now feel called upon to serve as Washburn County's next judge.
 
I am not tendering this application for purposes of career advancement because as for me, becoming a judge has not always been a lifelong goal. Indeed, I firmly believe the decision to become a judge should be less about a person's career aspirations and ego, and more about that person's proven track record of service to their community, their fairness and dedication, their work ethic, and their continued study of the law.
 
I feel compelled to apply for judge because the citizens of Wisconsin deserve a hardworking, honest judge who will not become complacent, but who will recommit each day to serving her community.
 
I was born in Washburn County and have spent most of my adult life living and working here. This is the place I call home and this is the place where I intend to live the rest of my life.
 
I grew up in a family which encouraged a life of service. Guided by that encouragement, I have been honored to serve as District Attorney. I want to continue to serve the people of Washburn County as their judge because I want to help strengthen my community and pledge to work tirelessly, within the proper judicial bounds, to do so.
 
1 am concerned with the limited resources available to young people in our community and how, as a result, those who cannot get a good job, or pursue higher education, often become entangled with drugs and alcohol. I care deeply about my community and I am concerned with the rise in crime due to the spike in methamphetamine and opioid addictions.
 
As District Attorney, I have worked excessively long hours, at night and on weekends, to keep up with the ever-expanding caseload, which is largely attributable to the spike in methamphetamine and opioids flowing through our county.
 
As District Attorney, I have paid special attention to vigorously prosecuting child pornography cases, property crimes, sexual assaults and drug-related offenses. As a result, I have had approximately twenty jury trials in the last two and half years.        I am honored to work hard to do the right thing. I am honored by the faith that Washburn County residents have already placed in me to elect me as their District Attorney.
 
l want to serve Washburn County as their judge with that same dedication. As judge, I believe a strong message must be sent to those who intentionally seek to harm our communities. However, I will also continue to support and encourage educational programs, mentorships and treatment courts, such as the Washburn County Drug Court for low risk, first time offenders. Serving as a member of Drug Court for over the last three years has given me the unique perspective to see how earnestly community members struggle with addiction and how very essential such programs are to the survival of our communities.
 
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.
In my opinion, United States v. Windsor, 133 S.Ct. 2675 (2013) has had the greatest positive impact on our democracy in the last 25 years.
 
Many, if not all of us, have been affected by U.S. v. Windsor. Although many of us are not members of a same-sex partnership, the odds are that we know someone, work with someone or love someone who is. Society has come a long way in terms of acceptance since 2013, due in large part to U.S. v. Windsor.
 
Separate yet unequal. The Defense of Marriage Act (hereafter DOMA), embodied that philosophy. DOMA was passed in the rnid-1990s, as States were just considering same sex partnerships. The very title of DOMA made clear the federal government's outright distain for same sex partnerships and Congress's fear that if granted equality, these couples would forever tarnish the sanctity of marriage. To discourage the taboo "choice", DOMA denied same sex couples significant governmental benefits by refusing to recognize civil unions as legitimate "marriages" in the eyes of the federal government.
 
Everything changed in 2013 with U.S. v. Windsor. In 2007 Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer were married in Ontario, Canada and their home state of New York recognized their union. Two short years later, however, Thea Spyer died leaving Windsor as sole beneficiary of her estate. Windsor attempted to claim the surviving spouse federal estate tax exemption but was barred by doing so by DOMA which specifically excluded same-sex partners from the act's definition of "spouse" and "marriage."
 
As a result of her choice of a same-sex spouse, Windsor inherited her wife's estate but paid costly in estate taxes. Ultimately Windsor filed suit, claiming the DOMA violated her 5th Amendment Equal Protection Rights.
 
In 2013 Justice Kennedy authored the majority's decision ruling DOMA unconstitutional, indicating;
 
"The avowed purpose and practical effect of the law here in question are to impose a disadvantage, a separate status, and so a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages made lawful by the unquestioned authority of the States." U.S. v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 744, 770, 133 S.Ct. 2675, 2693 (2013).
 
"It also forces same-sex couples to live as married for the purpose of state law but unmarried for the purpose of federal law, thus diminishing the stability and predictability of basic personal relations the State has found it proper to acknowledge and protect." Id., 570 U.S. 744, 747.
 
Windsor is so significant because it shows how, even decades after the civil rights era, the judiciary can apply traditional legal analysis to properly render significant change in our modern world. By doing so, the United States Supreme Court restored faith to many in our democracy who had been previously disenfranchised for the simple reason of whom they chose to love.
 
Undeniably, there are still parts of the country where people cannot bring themselves to put aside their prejudice and accept others. However, since U.S. v. Windsor, acceptance for same-sex couples has begun to flow like a tidal wave.
 
Two or three judges whom I admire and why:
Three circuit court judges that 1 have observed over the course of my career and whom I admire greatly are former Burnett County Judge Kenneth Kutz, Bayfield County Judge John P. Anderson and Sawyer County Judge John M. Yackel. These Judges have diverse personalities, yet all possess many qualities I admire.
 
I had the most exposure as a young lawyer before the Honorable Kenneth Kutz when he was the Burnett County Circuit Court Judge and I was serving part time as Burnett County's Assistant District Attorney from 2009 to 2016.
 
Judge Kutz impressed me each time I appeared before him because of his great depth of legal knowledge and his remarkably calm and patient temperament. I cannot recall more than once or twice over the seven years I appeared before him when Judge Kutz ever had to raise his voice to command the respect of those in his courtroom.
 
Judge Kutz remains one of the most respected Judges in our area not only because he is a scholar of the law, but also because he has the unique ability to render decisions and even impose harsh sentences by educating those before him and inspiring them, instead of using his power and authority to be disrespectful or disparaging.
 
Judge Yackel is yet another judge whom l greatly admire. I first encountered Judge Yackel when he served as Sawyer County's Assistant District Attorney. In that role, he and I interacted frequently when I served as guardian ad litem in Children In Need of Protection or Services cases.
 
When Judge Yackel took the bench in Sawyer County, he brought with him many qualities that had served him well as a prosecutor. For example, as a prosecutor John Yackel possessed a unique ability to cut to the heart of a dispute and assist others to put aside their petty differences so as to focus what was really important, such as the best interests of the child. He retains that ability now as Judge.
 
It is also evident from watching Judge Yackel that he cares passionately about Northwestern Wisconsin. While always being fair to each side, once an offender is convicted, Judge Yackel frequently takes a strong stance against those who seek to harm his community.
 
Finally, I greatly admire Bayfield County Judge John Anderson. Like Judge Yackel, Judge Anderson quickly analyzes a situation and focuses on the issue at the heart of whatever conflict is before him. It is my firm impression that Judge Anderson isn't swayed by private interests and is more concerned with doing what is right than what is popular. Judge Anderson uses his authority to change people's lives, often through brutal honestly in an attempt to help them realize the error of their ways.
 
All three have unique personalities and divergent theories about how best to administer justice. The common characteristics that each possess, and which I greatly admire, however, is their tireless work ethics and their genuine desire to administer justice fairly so as improve their communities.
 
The proper role of a judge:
Over the course of my career I have seen that the legal system functions the most smoothly, provides the most just outcomes, and inspires the most public confidence, when each party and their attorneys zealously advocate for their positions and the judge functions as a neutral and detached magistrate, weighing the facts with the law and rendering a fair and impartial decision.
 
Many times, over the course of my career I have seen the system work and I have seen the system fail.
 
The proper role of a judge is to first and foremost be well-educated and well-informed. No matter how well-meaning, a judge cannot function efficiently if she doesn't take her job extremely seriously, prepare for her cases, have strong attention to detail, and possess a firm understanding of the law.
 
A judge should not be complacent. The proper role of a judge is to never stop learning and never assume, just because they are wearing the black robe, that they are automatically the most informed person.
 
A good judge should have a strong personality so as to maintain order and command authority but should also be patient.
 
Over the course of my career I have seen justice delivered in many forms. Many times a judge can administer justice simply by allowing a party to feel as though they were respected and given an opportunity to be heard.

---