State v. Venema

¶ 1. Paul Venema was convicted of having a private interest in a public contract contrary to Wis. Stat. § 946.13(l)(a) (1999-2000). 1 On appeal, Venema argues that he could not have violated the statute as a matter of law because he left office before the contract was executed. Therefore, according to Venema, he never improperly wore "two hats." We reject this argument because it relies on a very narrow construction of the statute which we find unacceptable. Venema also argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion in limine to keep out evidence relating to his conduct at town board…