Marsy's Law: Appeals court panel kicks questions on victims rights amendment to state Supreme Court - Ashland Daily Press

MADISON — A state appeals court is asking that the state Supreme Court decide whether a constitutional amendment that sought to enhance the rights of crime victims in Wisconsin was properly put before voters before it was enacted last year.

Late last year, a Dane County judge ruled that the statewide ballot question on “Marsy’s Law” was improperly worded when it was presented to voters and that it inadequately spelled out the effect of the amendment would have on the rights of people accused of crimes.

Circuit Judge Frank Remington ruled in the case brought by the Wisconsin Justice Initiative that had the question been broken into two parts — one addressing greater rights for victims and another on the diminishment of the rights of the accused — voters would have been better informed about the overall effect the amendment would have.

Remington did not immediately nullify the amendment, which remains in effect today, so that appeals that would follow could be decided, ultimately by the state Supreme Court.

On Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the state District 3 Court of Appeals asked that the state Supreme Court bypass the appeals court and decide the case, citing its statewide importance, the novelty of some of the questions the appeal asks and the lack of significant legal authority on other questions.

“We urge the Supreme Court to accept this certification to determine — in the first instance and with finality — whether this important state constitutional provision was validly enacted,” the panel concluded in its 20-page request.

The Wisconsin Justice Initiative, along with attorneys Jacqueline Boynton, Jerome Buting and Craig Johnson and now-retired state Sen. Fred Risser, challenged the validity of the question put to voters. Remington agreed it was insufficient and did not comply with the requirements of the state constitution because it did not “reasonably, intelligently and fairly comprise or have reference to every essential element of the amendment,” was misleading, and should have been submitted as more than one ballot question.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission and other state officials appealed, and the appeals court panel of judges Lisa Stark, Thomas Hruz and Jennifer Nashold are now asking the high court to decide.

“These inquiries involve significant questions of state constitutional law, the resolution of which will have a sweeping effect on our criminal justice institutions and those operating within them, including victims, defendants, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement officials, and our courts,” the panel wrote. “Accordingly, it would be in the best interest of these groups, and the Wisconsin voters generally, to have a timely and final decision on the sufficiency of the ballot question producing an amendment to our state constitution.”

If Marsy’s Law is found to be invalid, the panel wrote, the Legislature might want to re-submit a proper ballot question to voters, and resolving the issues presented would be in the best interests of the proponents of Marsy’s Law.

The problem, the appeals court panel wrote, is that there is little case law that addresses the “every essential” test referenced in a 1925 state Supreme Court ruling and little case law that tells the Legislature how that test might mesh with another rule requiring separate ballot questions for distinct propositions within one amendment.

The Supreme Court will now decide whether it will take the case or send it back to the appeals court.

Reaction

Myranda Tanck, spokesperson for Marsy’s Law for Wisconsin, was confident the law would be upheld.

“We believe the will of the voters will prevail and Marsy’s Law for Wisconsin, which passed with 75 percent of the vote, will ultimately be upheld,” she said in a statement. “We are grateful Marsy’s Law remains in effect during this process, continuing to ensure Wisconsin crime victims have a stronger voice in the criminal justice process.”

Johnson, president of the Wisconsin Justice Initiative’s Board of Directors, said the law is an example of good intentions causing unintended chaos.

“Marsy’s Law has confused courts, prosecutors and the general public about when and how it applies and what ‘rights’ it confers,” he said in a statement. “It runs the risk of negatively affecting the constitutional rights of the accused in a way that the original proponents always denied was their intention. Yet that’s the stark reality, and voters were never informed about this. The ballot question did not explain the issue fully and fairly, and left people to vote in the dark.”

source: https://www.apg-wi.com/news/state/marsys-law-appeals-court-panel-kicks-questions-on-victims-rights-amendment-to-state-supreme-court/article_e7a97c92-6586-5900-9105-65af264f54d9.html

Your content is great. However, if any of the content contained herein violates any rights of yours, including those of copyright, please contact us immediately by e-mail at media[@]kissrpr.com.