Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. LaCount

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 10, 2008No. 2006AP672-CRPublished

1ConcurrenceAnn Walsh Bradley, J.

¶ 59. (concurring). I agree with the majority that the circuit court did not err in admitting expert testimony and that there was sufficient evidence presented to support LaCount's fraud conviction. I also agree with the majority that the circuit court did not err by allowing into evidence the results of the search of GP&L's office and that LaCount's right to a jury trial was not violated. I write separately, however, because I disagree with the majority's discussion regarding the seizure of documents outside the scope of the search warrant.

*121¶ 60. The majority correctly states that it is…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. United States v. RossSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. State v. DeSmidtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
  4. State v. WhitrockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. AndrewsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1996

1 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