Legal Opinion

State v. Holmes

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1982No. 81-1669-CR, 81-1774-WPublishedCited by 159 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShirley S. Abrahamson, J.

Each defendant filed a request for substitution of judge in a timely manner and in proper form pursuant to sec. 971.20, Stats. *341979-80. Each circuit court denied the request on the ground that sec. 971.20 is an unconstitutional legislative interference with the functioning of the judicial branch in violation of the Wisconsin Constitution.

Sec. 971.20 permits a defendant to file a statement that “the defendant requests a substitution for the Hon. . . . as judge.” Sec. 971.20(5), Stats. 1979-80. The request for substitution need give no reason for the requested substitution and no grounds for…

2Cases cited81 opinions

  1. Tumey v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. In Re Murchison.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
  3. Ward v. Village of MonroevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  5. Mayberry v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

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

3Cited by159 opinions

  1. State v. EricksonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Tetra Tech EC, Inc. v. Wisconsin Department of RevenueWisconsin Supreme Court · 2018
  3. People v. WalkerIllinois Supreme Court · 1988
  4. State v. BorrellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1992
  5. State Ex Rel. Friedrich v. Circuit Court for Dane CountyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1995

154 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