From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

STATE v. AUEL

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Mar 14, 1996
Case No. 95-0110-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Mar. 14, 1996)

Opinion

Case No. 95-0110-CR.

Opinion Released: March 14, 1996 Opinion Filed: March 14, 1996 This opinion will not be published. See RULE 809.23(1)(b)5, STATS.

APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Grant County: GEORGE S. CURRY, Judge. Affirmed.

Before Gartzke, P.J., Sundby and Vergeront, JJ.


Jane Auel appeals from a judgment convicting her of manufacturing more than 2500 grams of marijuana, § 161.41(1)(h)3, STATS., based on evidence that she grew it in and around her home. The court entered judgment pursuant to the jury's guilty verdict. The sole issue is whether the trial court should have excluded from evidence a largely inaudible tape recording. We conclude that the trial court properly allowed the jury to hear the tape, and therefore affirm.

Auel was a tenant in the home of Gary Pope, a large-scale marijuana dealer. Pope obtained at least some of his marijuana from plants started in his home and grown in his yard or nearby.

An acquaintance of Pope's, Dan Schutte, was arrested on drug charges. In exchange for various concessions he visited Auel while wearing a hidden microphone, which transmitted to a police tape recorder. At trial Schutte testified that Auel admitted during their conversation that more than thirty of the marijuana plants growing on the premises were hers. Schutte reported that Auel made a number of other comments indicating that she participated in Pope's enterprise. He also testified to observing her on other occasions tending marijuana plants on the premises.

The State also offered into evidence a tape recording of Schutte's conversation with Auel. The tape was largely inaudible, but did confirm Auel's statement that more than thirty of the plants were hers. The trial court admitted it over Auel's objection of unfair prejudice, because that one statement was both relevant and audible, while nothing else on the tape appeared prejudicial. In her testimony, Auel admitted making the statement about the plants, but asserted that she did so at Pope's request and that it was not true. She denied any other involvement in marijuana growing. Pope supported Auel's story. He testified that he told Auel to say that she grew the plants because Pope was tired of receiving Schutte's horticultural advice. The jury evidently believed Schutte's version and disbelieved Auel and Pope.

The trial court properly admitted the tape. We agree with federal decisions that admissibility of a partially inaudible tape is a matter for the trial court's discretion. United States v. Camargo , 908 F.2d 179, 183 (7th Cir. 1990). Auel admitted she made the inculpatory statement heard on the tape. Nothing else on the tape unfairly prejudiced her, and she did not testify nor offer proof that any of the inaudible portions contained exculpatory material. As a result, the trial court reasonably viewed the tape as trustworthy evidence.

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

STATE v. AUEL

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Mar 14, 1996
Case No. 95-0110-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Mar. 14, 1996)
Case details for

STATE v. AUEL

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF WISCONSIN, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JANE L. AUEL…

Court:Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Date published: Mar 14, 1996

Citations

Case No. 95-0110-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Mar. 14, 1996)