Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Hanson

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 1, 2012No. 2008AP2759-CRPublished

1DissentShirley S. Abrahamson, C.J.

¶ 54. (dissenting). I dissent because the majority opinion reads the words "willful or wanton" out of Wis. Stat. § 346.04(3). Additionally, the majority presents an imbalanced fact section, relying primarily on the law enforcement officer's version of the events rather than telling the whole story. The majority's statement of the facts seems like a subtle attempt to make the legal reasoning more persuasive. I begin by discussing the statute and then try to present the defendant's version of the events so that the reader gets a more balanced statement of the facts.

I

¶ 55. The defendant was…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Ratzlaf v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. UNITED STATES of America v. Darus H. ZEHRBACH, Appellant in No. 93-7477. Alex A. Mervis, Appellant in No. 93-7493Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
  3. State v. ColeWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State v. PrestonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1874
  5. State v. CissellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985

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