Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Lohmeier

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided November 29, 1996No. 94-2187-CRPublished

1DissentJanine P. Geske, J.

I dissent because I believe that there is a reasonable likelihood that the contributory negligence instruction, in combination with Wis JI — Criminal 1185 and 1186, misled the jury into believing it could not consider the young women's conduct in regard to Lohmeier's statutory affirmative defense. I would affirm the court of appeals and hold that there is a reasonable likelihood that the contributory negligence instruction misled the jury, for several reasons.

First, the defense essentially conceded these elements of the charges under Wis. Stat. § 940.09(l)(a) and Wis. Stat. § 940.09(l)(b):…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hart v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  2. State v. SchulzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Boldt v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
  4. State v. LohmeierCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API