State v. Guzman

5 Citing cases

  1. State v. Krause

    168 Wis. 2d 578 (Wis. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 42 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding statements by defendant that he “didn't believe in needles” and “d[id]n't want AIDS” were insufficient to establish fear exception

    What is reasonable depends on all the circumstances surrounding the search or seizure and the nature of the search or seizure itself. State v. Guzman, 161 Wis.2d 80, 88, 467 N.W.2d 564, 566 (Ct.App. 1991), aff'd, 166 Wis.2d 577, 480 N.W.2d 446, petition for cert. filed, No. 91-8133 (May 4, 1992). The reasonableness of a questioned action is judged by balancing its intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests against its promotion of legitimate governmental interests.

  2. State v. Guzman

    166 Wis. 2d 577 (Wis. 1992)   Cited 70 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Approving presentencing urinalysis of a defendant convicted of illegal drug dealing over a strong dissent

    For the plaintiff-respondent the cause was argued by David J. Becker, assistant attorney general, with whom on the brief was James E. Doyle, attorney general. (Affirming and remanding 161 Wis.2d 80, 467 N.W.2d 564 (Ct. App. 1991).) DAY, J.

  3. State v. Dade

    Case No. 99-2183-CR (Wis. Ct. App. May. 3, 2000)

    But it is also true that sentencing guidelines may serve as direction for the court in making its sentencing consideration. This is because a trial court should consider all relevant information bearing upon the sentence. SeeState v. Guzman, 161 Wis.2d 80, 90, 467 N.W.2d 564 (Ct.App. 1991), aff'd, 166 Wis.2d 577, 480 N.W.2d 446 (1992). ¶ 5.

  4. State v. Nagel

    Case No. 97-3417 (Wis. Ct. App. Apr. 28, 1998)

    Moreover, in State v. Voss, 205 Wis.2d 586, 596, 556 N.W.2d 433, 436 (Ct.App. 1996), this court specifically recognized that art. I, § 9m of the Wisconsin Constitution confers upon a crime victim the right to address a sentencing court. Finally, this State recognizes a strong public policy that all information relevant to sentencing be brought to the attention of the court. State v. Guzman, 161 Wis.2d 80, 90, 467 N.W.2d 564, 567 (Ct.App. 1991). "A statement from the victims about how the crime affected their lives is relevant to one of the considerations that a judge must take into account at sentencing — the gravity of the crime."

  5. State v. Helgeland

    Case No. 97-1237-CR (Wis. Ct. App. Sep. 24, 1997)

    We stress that this authority to consider the guidelines does not come from the guideline statute since that statute is expressly limited to PAC sentences. Rather, this authority stems from the sentencing court's right, based on public policy, to all relevant information which bears upon the sentence. SeeState v.Guzman, 161 Wis.2d 80, 90, 467 N.W.2d 564, 567 (Ct.App. 1991), aff'd, 166 Wis.2d 577, 480 N.W.2d 446 (1992). That brings us to Helgeland's alternative argument.