State of Wisconsin, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Johrie Dyess, Defendant-Appellant-Petitioner

Summary

The court held that the jury instruction improperly required the jury to find negligence if it found that Dyess exceeded the posted speed limit, violating the statutory rule governing presumptions in criminal cases. Because the instruction removed the jury's independent consideration of negligence, and the evidence of speeding was disputed, the error was prejudicial and required reversal and a new trial. The court declined to reach the constitutional challenge. Steinmetz, J., dissenting, would have affirmed because the instruction was legally proper or harmless in light of the complete charge and the evidence.