Opinion
No. 2013AP1882.
2014-06-24
In re the Return of Property in STATE v. Aaron OLS: Aaron C. Ols, Appellant, v. City of Milwaukee and State of Wisconsin, Respondents.
The City carries the burden of proving by the “greater weight of the credible evidence” that Ols's firearm was used to commit a crime. 4 See Return of Property in Jones v. State, 226 Wis.2d 565, 595, 594 N.W.2d 738 (1999) (“the State [has] the burden of establishing that the property ... constitutes contraband as defined by Wis. Stat. § 968.13(1)(a), and need not be returned”). Whether a party has met its burden of proof is a question of law that we examine de novo. Burg v. Miniature Precision Components, Inc., 111 Wis.2d 1, 12, 330 N.W.2d 192 (1983). Having limited its argument before the circuit court to the incident at the park, the City cannot now argue that the incident at Ols's home is also relevant. We do not generally allow parties to raise issues for the first time on appeal. See Apex Elecs. Corp. v. Gee, 217 Wis.2d 378, 384, 577 N.W.2d 23 (1998). Here, the City's failure to argue before the circuit court that the incident at Ols's home was relevant to the discussion of whether Ols committed the crime of disorderly conduct deprived both Ols and the circuit court of the opportunity to address the issue and to ensure that all of the relevant facts regarding the incident at Ols's home were in the record.