Legal Opinion

State v. Noble

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided May 24, 2001No. 99-3271-CRPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDykman, P.J.

¶ 1. Debra Noble appeals from a judgment convicting her of perjury. While she identifies seven issues, many are interconnected. We conclude that there are three issues we need to address. These are: (1) Was the evidence sufficient to convict her? (2) Was she denied due process of law because the State's investigator destroyed the notes of his investigation? and (3) Should the transcript of a John Doe proceeding that formed the basis for the perjury charge be excluded because the person who questioned her at the John Doe was not authorized to practice law?

¶ 2. We conclude that the evidence was…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. State v. WashingtonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State v. ShafferCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1980
  4. State v. CummingsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State v. EichmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Unnamed Person No.1 v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. NobleWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State v. ParkerCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2002
  4. State Ex Rel. Unnamed Person No.1 v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  5. State v. NobleCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001

2 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