From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Eggenberger

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.
Sep 24, 2013
838 N.W.2d 866 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013)

Opinion

No. 2012AP2345.

2013-09-24

STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Charles EGGENBERGER, Defendant–Appellant.

These assertions do not provide any evidence that Eggenberger's medications made him unable to distinguish between right and wrong with respect to the sexual assaults of his step-granddaughter. Eggenberger does not define the terms “psycho-somatic reactions,” “Serotonin Syndrome,” and “Prozac poisoning” or suggest that these conditions affect a person's ability to tell right from wrong. At most, Eggenberger has shown that his medications “caused [him] to lack judgment” and lowered his inhibitions. This is insufficient to support an involuntary intoxication defense. Eggenberger discouraged the victim from reporting the assaults to her family, telling her he would go to jail for the rest of his life and her father would probably kill him. He stated, “[I]f you love me ..., you won't say anything to anybody.” When the victim informed Eggenberger that “they said in school that I should tell[,]” he responded:



Summaries of

State v. Eggenberger

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.
Sep 24, 2013
838 N.W.2d 866 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013)
Case details for

State v. Eggenberger

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Wisconsin, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Charles EGGENBERGER…

Court:Court of Appeals of Wisconsin.

Date published: Sep 24, 2013

Citations

838 N.W.2d 866 (Wis. Ct. App. 2013)
351 Wis. 2d 224
2013 WI App. 128

Citing Cases

State v. Amonoo

State v. Evans, 2004 WI 84, ¶ 32, 273 Wis.2d 192, 682 N.W.2d 784, abrogated on other grounds by State ex rel.…

Gish v. Dittmann

But hostility and aggression are not the same as the inability to tell right from wrong. See, e.g., State v.…