State v. Sveum

Michael Sveum appeals from a judgment convicting him of stalking, contrary to § 940.32(2) and (2m), Stats., harassment, contrary to § 947.013(lm)(b) and (lr), Stats., violating a harassment injunction, contrary to § 813.125(7), Stats., and criminal damage to property, contrary to § 943.01(1), Stats. He argues that he is entitled to a new trial on all counts because the trial court improperly denied the admission of exculpatory testimony. We conclude that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in ruling that the evidence was inadmissible hearsay. Sveum also argues that the evidence…