December 11, 2015 at 4:34 p.m.
Judge rules on evidence in Wolf murder case
Three motions heard Thursday
Judge rules on evidence in Wolf murder case
In a nearly three-hour hearing Thursday afternoon, Branch II Judge Michael Bloom ruled on a total of three motions, one by Oneida County District Attorney Michael Schiek seeking to introduce 11 different exhibits of past acts allegedly committed by Shannon J. Wolf the state claims will establish his ex-wife and primary accuser Latoya Wolf was afraid of him.
Wolf's defense attorney Maggie Hogan also filed a motion seeking to introduce 14 incidents she claims will establish Latoya Wolf as a habitual liar. Hogan also filed a motion seeking to bar the state from using all or part of an interview her client gave with a detective on Feb. 12 after he was first brought back to Rhinelander from Stanley Correctional Facility.
Shannon Wolf, charged with first-degree intentional homicide as party to the crime, is scheduled to go on trial starting Jan. 11.
He is accused of luring Kenneth "Punky" Wells under the Davenport Street bridge in June 2003, striking him with a rock and placing his body in the Wisconsin River. Latoya Wolf has also been charged in connection with Wells' death.
Latoya Wolf, who was originally charged with the same crime as Shannon Wolf, pled guilty to second-degree intentional homicide on July 30 as part of a plea agreement. Bloom sentenced her to 12 years in prison and 13 years extended supervision on Nov. 6. As part of her plea agreement she is required her to testify "truthfully" at Shannon Wolf's trial.
Before Bloom ruled on the motions, Rhinelander Police Detective Joshua Chiamulera was called to testify about how he and Rhinelander Police Chief Michael Steffes went to Stanley, picked up Shannon Wolf, transported him back to Rhinelander and then questioned him for nearly an hour in regard to Wells' death.
Hogan was seeking to exclude a video recording of that interview.
Chiamulera testified that he and Steffes picked up Wolf at the Stanley prison in a city squad car, with the chief driving and Chiamulera riding in the front passenger seat. He testified that as the squad car entered U.S. Highway 29 after leaving the prison, he read Wolf his Miranda rights from a printed card. He testified that shortly after Wolf was read his rights, he noticed the in-car recording equipment that they had hoped would document the trip was malfunctioning. He also said a back-up camera he wanted to use also did not work properly. Unable to document any exchange between them and Wolf, Chiamulera said they did not question Wolf on the ride back to Rhinelander.
"It was just small talk all the way back," Chiamulera said.
Shortly after their arrival at the police station in Rhinelander, Chiamulera said they learned there would be a delay in booking their prisoner into the Oneida County Jail. They then took Wolf into an interview room at the police department and began a recorded interview about Wells' death.
Starting at about 29.5 minutes into the questioning, Wolf replied to a question with a statement saying he wanted to remain silent. The questioning continued, with Wolf occasionally responding to a question by repeating that he wished to remain silent. About 55 minutes into the questioning, Wolf stated he wanted a lawyer, at which point the interview ended and he was booked into jail.
During cross-examination Hogan asked Chiamulera why the questioning continued after Wolf said he wanted to be silent.
"So, basically, he was asserting his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent?" Hogan asked.
Chiamulera said he thought the statement was a reply to that particular question, noting at a later part of the interview Wolf "revoked" his rights, rather than invoked them. When pressed by Hogan, Chiamulera said he wasn't sure if Wolf said "invoke" or "revoke" and that he would have to watch the video again with Hogan to be sure.
Bloom cited a court of appeals ruling that once a person being questioned by police invokes his Miranda rights, even if not using the precise words, an interrogation must stop.
"Magic words are not necessary," the judge said.
He then ruled that everything on the 58-minute recording after Wolf first says he wishes to be silent at the 29-minute, 45-second mark is inadmissible at trial.
On the prior bad acts motions, Bloom ruled that some of the incidents each side wanted to introduce would be allowed while others would not. Each incident was reviewed before a ruling was made. Further complicating matters, in many cases the incidents had to be judged according to guidelines in three different statutes. In a couple of cases, both sides sought to admit the same or related incidents.
Bloom said he wasn't "trying to micromanage the parties or script the presentation of evidence," but said his goal was to prevent the trial from becoming bogged down with mini-trials on the respective incidents.
However, he noted that the complex history of the former husband and wife has to be examined at trial in order for Shannon Wolf to receive a fair trial.
"We have a long history between Mr. and Ms. Wolf that goes back a long way," Bloom said, adding that he intends "to exercise some degree of management of this trial."
Another hearing is set for Dec. 17 to determine if expert witness testimony will be allowed at trial, and if so, what kind. Any motions filed before that date will also be heard at that time.
Jamie Taylor may be reached at jtaylor@ lakelandtimes.com.
Comments:
You must login to comment.