State, Respondent v. Lenarchick, Appellant

Summary

The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed Lenarchick's first-degree murder conviction and remanded for a new trial on two prejudicial errors: the trial court's refusal to let him testify denying the alleged confession the State introduced through a police officer recounting Deborah Miles' statement, and its limitation of cross-examination of State's witness Nolte to whether promises had been made, barring inquiry into charges dismissed or held open while the case was pending. The court held Miles' prior statement admissible as a prior inconsistent statement because the trial judge could doubt the good faith of her memory-loss claim, and held that admission of the officer's testimony did not violate the sixth amendment because Miles was produced and subject to cross-examination. All remaining claimed errors — cumulative impeachment, the Popeye excited utterance, sec. 971.24 production and equal protection, suppression of the photographs, midtrial interview conditions, jury instructions, and most closing-argument restrictions — were found non-prejudicial, although two closing-argument restrictions (a per se ban on reading from the transcript and a ban on commenting on the instructions) were deemed erroneous but harmless.