No decisions were released.

• Adverse Possession/ Property/ Evidence/ Statutes
  
  Howe v. Boyle
  Docket: 2008AP002371 02-03-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Patricia Boyle appeals a judgment granting Peter Myles Howe, Jennifer Megan Howe Bennett, Melanie Joellen Howe Zimmer, Tori Jo Williams Wible, Tracy Jay Williams Beck and Tiffany Johns Williams, Jr. (collectively the Howes) title to a portion of her property by adverse possession. Boyle contends the circuit court's findings did not support a judgment for adverse possession. She also contends there is insufficient evidence to make the necessary findings. We agree and reverse the judgment.
• Contracts/ Property/ Duty Of Good Faith/ Specific Performance/ Damages
  
  Baldwin v. Land
  Docket: 2008AP001374 02-05-09
  

  VERGERONT, J. This appeal arises out of a contract between F.C. Land, LLC, and Frank Baldwin for the sale of vacant land owned by F.C. Land. Baldwin initiated this suit after a contingency concerning approval of a certified survey map was not fulfilled within the relevant time period and the transaction did not close. The circuit court dismissed on summary judgment Baldwin's claim for breach of the duty of good faith implied in every contract and, after a trial to the court, concluded that F.C. Land was not obligated to convey the land upon Baldwin's unilateral waiver of the contingency. Baldwin challenges both these decisions. For the reasons explained below, we affirm.
• Criminal Law/ Evidence
  
  State v. Castillo
  Docket: 2008AP000226 02-04-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Jose Castillo appeals from a judgment convicting him of two counts of repeated first-degree sexual assault of the same children under thirteen years, Y.C. and D.C., and first-degree sexual assault of D.C., and from the order denying his postconviction motion. On appeal, Castillo argues that the evidence was insufficient to convict him and that the victims' testimony was incredible and should have been disregarded by the jury. We disagree and affirm.
• Criminal Law/ Evidence Ruling/ Custody/ Miranda/ Knowing and Voluntary Waiver Of Rights/ Constitutional Law-Due Process
  
  State v. Xiong
  Docket: 2008AP001137 02-03-09
  

  BRENNAN, J. The State of Wisconsin appeals from a non-final order, which granted Paul Wa Tou Xiong's motion seeking to suppress statements he made to police. The State contends that the trial court erred in two respects. First, the State argues that Xiong was not "in custody" during his interview at the police station; thus, any statements Xiong made were volunteered and not subject to suppression. Second, the State contends that even if Xiong was "in custody," the statements need not be suppressed as he was properly advised of his Miranda rights; thereafter, he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his rights. Because the record reflects that Miranda rights were properly given and Xiong knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived those rights, the trial court erred when it suppressed the statements. We reverse the trial court order suppressing Xiong's statements made to police and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
• Criminal Law/ Evidence Ruling/ Plain Error/ Ineffective/ New Trial
  
  State v. Perez
  Docket: 2008AP001061 02-03-09
  

  FINE, J. Manuel R. Perez appeals a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of conspiracy to deliver more than forty grams of cocaine, see WIS. STAT. §§ 961.41(1)(cm)4, 939.31, and an order denying his postconviction motion for a new trial. Perez claims that: (1) his trial lawyer was ineffective; (2) he is entitled to a new trial under the plain-error doctrine or in the interest of justice; and (3) the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress wiretap evidence. We affirm.
• Criminal Law/ Evidence/ Judicial Authority-Discretion
  
  State v. Combs
  Docket: 2008AP001197 02-05-09
  

  DYKMAN, J. Carson Darnell Combs appeals pro se from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of one count of misdemeanor theft (embezzlement), contrary to WIS. STAT. § 943.20(1)(b) and (3)(a) (2005-06), for embezzling funds while serving as secretary-treasurer of Local Lodge 1771 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers' Union (Local 1771). We affirm.
• Criminal Law/ Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel/ New Trial
  
  State v. Orengo
  Docket: 2007AP001954 02-05-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Juan Orengo appeals a judgment of conviction and an order denying postconviction relief. We affirm.
• Criminal Law/ Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel/ New Trial
  
  State v. Jackson
  Docket: 2008AP000651 02-03-09
  

  BRENNAN, J. Rahim Abdul Jackson appeals from a judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of five counts of armed robbery with threat of force as a party to a crime, contrary to WIS. STAT. §§ 943.32(1)(b) & (2) and 939.05 (2005-06). He also appeals from an order denying his postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Jackson claims: (1) his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to call two alibi witnesses; and (2) he is entitled to a new trial in the interests of justice. We reject both contentions and affirm the judgment and order.
• Criminal Law/ OWI/ Miranda/ Custody/ Constitutional Law/ Evidence/ Probable Cause/ Searches/ Arrest
  
  State v. Gantner
  Docket: 2008AP001592 02-05-09
  State v. Gantner
  Docket: 2008AP001593 02-05-09
  

  LUNDSTEN, J. Ronald Gantner appeals two circuit court judgments, one convicting him of possession of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia, and the other convicting him of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of a controlled substance (fourth offense). His challenge goes to the circuit court's denial of his motion to suppress. He argues that the police should have given him Miranda warnings before asking him if he had been drinking, lacked probable cause to administer a preliminary breath test (PBT), and improperly searched his vehicle incident to arrest. We affirm the judgments.
• Criminal Law/ Reasonable Suspicion/ Traffic Stops/ Evidence
  
  State v. Martin
  Docket: 2008AP002018 02-03-09
  

  BRUNNER, J. Steven Martin appeals a judgment of conviction for possessing drug paraphernalia, contrary to WIS. STAT. § 961.573(1). He contends the court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, claiming reasonable suspicion did not exist to justify the stop. We disagree and affirm the judgment.
• Criminal Law/ Resentencing
  
  State v. Porter
  Docket: 2008AP000343 02-05-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Tobarus Porter appeals a judgment of conviction and an order denying his postconviction motion. We reverse and remand for resentencing because it is not clear that the court considered the sentencing guideline.
• Criminal Law/ Substitution Of Attorneys/ Evidence/ Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel/ Sentencing
  
  State v. Pineas
  Docket: 2007AP001982 02-04-09
  Recommended for Publication
  

  SNYDER, J. Anthony L. Prineas appeals from a judgment of conviction on two counts of second-degree sexual assault and from an order denying postconviction relief. He contends that the court erroneously denied his request to substitute counsel prior to trial, allowed inadmissible testimony into evidence during the jury trial, imposed an unduly harsh sentence, and failed to grant postconviction relief for ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We affirm the judgment and order of the circuit court.
• Family Law/ Adoption/ Notice/ Procedure/ Petitions
  
  Sandra R.K. v. Winnebago County
  Docket: 2008AP002151 02-04-09
  Sandra R.K. v. Winnebago County
  Docket: 2008AP002152 02-04-09
  Sandra R.K. v. Winnebago County
  Docket: 2008AP002553 02-04-09
  Sandra R.K. v. Winnebago County
  Docket: 2008AP002554 02-04-09
  

  ANDERSON, P.J. In appeal Nos. 2008AP2151 and 2008AP2152, Elizabeth K. is appealing from orders of the circuit court dismissing her petition to adopt her grandchildren Elizabeth A.K. and Brett A.K. In appeal Nos. 2008AP2553 and 2008AP2554, Elizabeth is appealing from the orders of the circuit court denying her request that transcripts be prepared and released to her to permit her to prosecute the underlying appeals. Because we affirm the dismissal of the adoption petitions, we need not address the court's refusal to release the transcripts.
• Family Law/ Divorce/ Child Support/ Administrative Regulations/ Judicial Authority-Discretion
  
  Haye v. Haye
  Docket: 2007AP001538 02-05-09
  

  PER CURIAM. John Haye appeals an order modifying his child support obligation. John argues, notwithstanding the wording of WIS. ADMIN. CODE § DWD 40.04(5)(a) (January 2004), which provides a court "may" apply reduced child support percentages to a high-income payer, that a court is required to do so absent a determination that use of § DWD 40.04 (5)(a) would be unfair. John also argues the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion by refusing to grant the high-income payer reduction in this case.
• Family Law/ Divorce/ Child Support/ Financial Disclosure/ Statutes
  
  Stevenson v. Stevenson
  Docket: 2007AP002143 02-04-09
  Recommended for Publication
  

  ANDERSON, P.J. Jeffery B. Stevenson played a game of "cat and mouse" with the court for nine years. He has finally been caught. Jeffery argues that he did not fail to make the required financial disclosure at the time of his divorce from Tina L. Stevenson (n/k/a Tina L. Cook). We disagree. Jeffery claims that the trial court's retroactive adjustment to his child support obligation was not warranted. We disagree. In the alternative, Jeffery argues that if any child support adjustment is justified, it should be limited to the years 1997, 1998 and 1999 because full disclosure of all his income tax returns from the year 2000 forward had been made and increased support has been set as a result of that disclosure. Again, we disagree. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
• Family Law/ Divorce/ Child Support/ Property Division/ Attorney Fees/ Maintenance
  
  Buettgen v. Buettgen
  Docket: 2007AP000998 02-03-09
  

  PER CURIAM. John Buettgen appeals his judgment of divorce. Buettgen alleges numerous errors concerning child support, maintenance, property division and a finding of multiple violations of the temporary order. Buettgen also contends the circuit court erred by requiring him to contribute toward his ex-wife's attorney fees. We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for further proceedings.
• OWI/ Evidence/ Evidence Ruling/ Reasonable Suspicion/ Probable Cause/ Arrest
  
  State v. Soletske
  Docket: 2008AP002155 02-03-09
  

  HOOVER, P.J. Chad Soletske appeals a judgment of conviction for operating while intoxicated, third offense. Soletske contends the circuit court erroneously denied his motion to suppress. We disagree and affirm.
• Standing/ Timeliness/ Public Policy/ Wills/ Evidence/ Statutes/ Undue Influence
  
  La Court v. Krause
  Docket: 2007AP002704 02-03-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Dean Krause appeals a judgment entered upon a jury verdict. Krause raises issues of standing, timeliness of the lawsuit, and public policy. We reject Krause's claims and affirm.
• Summary Judgment/ Lemon Laws/ Statutes
  
  B.C.R. Trucking v. P.A.C.C.A.R. Trucking
  Docket: 2008AP001196 02-05-09
  Recommended for Publication
  

  DYKMAN, J. BCR Trucking, LLC, appeals from an order granting summary judgment to PACCAR, Inc., in BCR's Lemon Law action and a subsequent judgment ordering BCR to return the truck it purchased from PACCAR in exchange for the purchase amount less depreciation plus interest. BCR contends that PACCAR is not entitled to summary judgment because there are material factual issues as to whether PACCAR violated Wisconsin's Lemon Law. BCR also contends that the trial court erred in reducing the refund amount based on the truck's depreciation from the date PACCAR offered to replace it. We conclude that PACCAR is entitled to summary judgment on BCR's Lemon Law claim because the undisputed facts demonstrate that PACCAR met its statutory requirements. We further conclude that the trial court's decision to reduce the refund amount based on the truck's depreciation, and to add interest, adhered to the purpose of the Lemon Law and thus was not erroneous.
• Towns & Cities/ Property/ Zoning/ Ordinances
  
  Janacek Investment v. City of New Berlin
  Docket: 2008AP001432 02-04-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Janacek Investment, Inc., and Hans G. Stute (together, Janacek) appeal from a certiorari review affirming a decision of the City of New Berlin Zoning Board of Appeals (the Board). The Board upheld the City Plan Commission's grant of a use approval to Deer Creek Inn and Conference Center, LLC (Deer Creek). Janacek's essential claim is that the Board did not act according to law. Janacek contends the development for which the use approval was granted does not conform to zoning ordinances in existence when the Planned Unit Development (PUD) was created years earlier, effectively improperly amending the PUD or retroactively applying a subsequent ordinance. We conclude that the Board acted according to law and therefore affirm the decision of the circuit court upholding the Board's determination.
• Trusts/ Property/ Probate
  
  Trust of Schleinitz v. Maclay
  Docket: 2008AP000677 02-05-09
  

  DYKMAN, J. The Trust of Rene von Schleinitz appeals from a judgment declaring that Geoffrey and Edith Maclay own a parcel of land claimed by both the Maclays and the Trust. The Trust contends that the trial court's declaration of property rights in this case is contrary to a previous probate judgment concerning the same property, and that its factual findings are clearly erroneous. The Maclays respond that the probate judgment and the trial court's factual findings establish that they own the land in fee simple. The Maclays also cross-appeal from the portion of the court's judgment determining that the Maclays' alternative grounds for relief on the basis that one of the trustees is disqualified in this matter is inapplicable. We conclude that the probate judgment establishes that the Trust, not the Maclays, owns the land at issue. We further conclude that we have no basis to order the trial court to withdraw language from its findings and conclusions. We therefore reverse.