State v. Blanck

4 Citing cases

  1. State v. Hesser

    922 N.W.2d 312 (Wis. Ct. App. 2018)

    His self-serving, speculative assertions are not enough to show actual prejudice. See State v. Blanck , 2001 WI App 288, ¶ 23, 249 Wis. 2d 364, 638 N.W.2d 910. Therefore, the circuit court did not err by permitting the amendment to the Information.

  2. State v. Arient

    2011 WI App. 114 (Wis. Ct. App. 2011)

    A defendant has a due process right to be free from excessive precharging delay which substantially prejudices his or her right to a fair trial. State v. Blanck, 2001 WI App 288, ¶ 21, 249 Wis. 2d 364, 638 N.W.2d 910. "To establish a due process violation, a defendant must prove that actual prejudice has been suffered as a result of the delay, and must show that the government caused the delay for an improper purpose." Id., ¶ 22.

  3. State v. Urdahl

    2005 WI App. 191 (Wis. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 47 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Explaining the contrasting remedies available for Statutory and constitutional speedy trial violations

    Under the Due Process Clause, the defendant must demonstrate that he or she suffered actual prejudice as a result of the delay and must show that the government caused the delay for an improper purpose. State v. Blanck, 2001 WI App 288, ¶ 22, 249 Wis. 2d 364, 638 N.W.2d 910. ¶ 18.

  4. In re Marriage Monette

    644 N.W.2d 293 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002)

    We decline to review issues inadequately briefed." State v. Blanck, 2001 WI 288, ¶ 27, 249 Wis.2d 364, 638 N.W.2d 910. Also, "this court does not consider arguments broadly stated but not specifically argued." Id.