Legal Opinion

State v. Turk

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided January 4, 1990No. 89-0886-CRPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGartzke, P.J.

Timmy Turk appeals from a judgment of conviction for causing great bodily harm to another human being by the operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant, sec. 940.25(1)(a), Stats. The issue is whether the trial court should have admitted expert testimony regarding the victims' failures to wear seat belts. Section 940.25(2) provides in part: "The actor has a defense if it appears by a preponderance of the evidence that the great bodily harm would have occurred even if the actor had not been under the influence of an intoxicant." The trial court held that the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. CaibaiosaiWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
  2. State v. NesterWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1985
  3. State v. City of La CrosseCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1984
  4. State v. LoomerCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
  5. Caibaiosai v. BarringtonDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1986

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Allen v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State v. HubkaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1992
  3. State v. LohmeierWisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
  4. People v. McAfeeColorado Court of Appeals · 2004
  5. State v. FreelandCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API