No decisions were released.

• Contracts/ Employment Law/ Cities
  
  Champan v. Village of Elm Grove
  Docket: 2008AP001770 11-11-09
  

  PER CURIAM. The Village of Elm Grove has appealed from an order interpreting and enforcing an agreement (the Agreement) executed by the Village and the respondent, Michael Champan, in December 1994. The trial court determined that, as used in the Agreement, the phrase "entering retirement status" was ambiguous. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court held that, at age 54, Champan was entitled to the same health and dental benefits that would be paid for any other supervisory or managerial employee of the Elm Grove Police Department (EGPD) entering retirement status at that time for any reason, including leaving employment due to duty disability. We affirm the trial court's order.
• Criminal Law/ Constitutional Law/ Pro Se/ Right To Defense/ Evidence/ New Trial/ Interest Of Justice/ Judicial Authority-Discretion
  
  State v. Avidan
  Docket: 2008AP003060 11-12-09
  

  BRIDGE, J. Daniel Avidan appeals the judgment convicting him of second-degree sexual assault and the order denying his postconviction motion for a new trial. He argues that he is entitled to a new trial for the following reasons: (1) the circuit court ceded the decision to require him to wear an electronic security device during trial to law enforcement officers rather than making its own decision on the record at the time of trial; (2) the security device interfered with his constitutional right to represent himself, to be present at trial, and to testify on his own behalf; and (3) he was denied his constitutional right to present a defense when the circuit court denied his request to admit evidence at trial that the victim had a sexually transmitted disease which Avidan observed just before the alleged sexual assault, and which caused him to discontinue sexual activity with her before penetration occurred. He also seeks a new trial in the interests of justice. We reject Avidan's first two arguments, and, as to the third argument, we assume for the sake of argument that error occurred, and conclude that it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that any error is harmless. We also reject Avidan's request for a new trial in the interests of justice.
• Criminal Law/ Evidence/ Procedure/ Statutes/ Judicial Authority-Discretion
  
  State v. Daniel
  Docket: 2008AP002109 11-11-09
  

  PER CURIAM. John W. Daniel appeals from the judgment of conviction entered against him. Daniel argues that the circuit court erred: (1) when it allowed the State to play tape recordings without providing the defense with transcribed copies of the same recordings, (2) when it limited evidence of a witness's prior convictions, and (3) when it played the tape recordings a second time for the jury during deliberations. Because we conclude that the circuit court did not err, we affirm.
• Criminal Law/ Sentencing Modification/ New Factor/ Statutes/ Department of Corrections
  
  State v. Schladweiler
  Docket: 2008AP003119 11-11-09
  Recommended for Publication
  

  NEUBAUER, P.J. Jeremy Schladweiler appeals from a postconviction order denying his motion for sentence modification. Schladweiler contends that he is entitled to resentencing based on a "new factor," namely that the department of corrections (DOC) denied him placement in the Challenge Incarceration Program (CIP) despite the trial court's determination at sentencing that Schladweiler was eligible for the program. The trial court's statutorily required CIP eligibility determination at sentencing is but one criteria considered by the DOC, see WIS. STAT. §§ 973.01(3m) and 302.045(2) (2007-08), and the DOC's subsequent denial of an inmate's placement in the program does not constitute a new factor for purposes of sentence modification. We affirm the trial court's ruling.
• Criminal Law/ Sentencing/ Resentencing/ Judicial Authority-Discretion
  
  State v. Long
  Docket: 2008AP003186 11-10-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Christopher Long appeals a judgment of conviction, entered upon his guilty pleas, on two counts of robbery as party to a crime. Long also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion for resentencing. Long asserts the trial court erroneously exercised its sentencing discretion. We reject this argument and affirm the judgment and order.
• Criminal Law/ Sex Offender Registry/ Sentencing/ Plea Withdrawal/ Sentencing Modification
  
  State v. Hollimon
  Docket: 2008AP002461 11-11-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Jessie L. Hollimon has appealed from a judgment convicting him of one count of failing to comply with the requirements of the sex offender registry in violation of WIS. STAT. § 301.45(6)(a)1. (2007-08), and from an order denying his motion for postconviction relief. We affirm the judgment and the order.
• Criminal Law/ Statutes/ Evidence/ Judicial Authority-Discretion/ Harmless Error
  
  State v. King
  Docket: 2008AP002673 11-12-09
  

  BRIDGE, J. Peter J. King, Jr., appeals from judgments of conviction entered against him and the order denying his motion for postconviction relief. Following a jury trial, King was convicted of one count of use of a computer to facilitate a child sex crime, in violation of WIS. STAT. § 948.075(1) (2003-04), and child enticement, in violation of WIS. STAT. § 948.07(1) (2003-04). King contends on appeal that the circuit court improperly admitted evidence of his prior conviction for fourth-degree sexual assault and evidence that he was in possession of child pornography. We disagree with both contentions and affirm.
• Family Law/ Divorce/ Maintenance/ Judicial Authority-Discretion
  
  Meisner v. Meisner
  Docket: 2009AP000758 11-11-09
  

  PER CURIAM. Kathy Meisner and Michael Meisner divorced after a seventeen-year marriage. Kathy appeals from the maintenance portion of the judgment of divorce, challenging both the amount and the duration. We conclude that the award reflects a proper exercise of the trial court's discretion. We affirm.
• Frivolous/ Attorney Fees/ Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)/ Procedure Error/ Court’s Bias/ Evidence
  
  Parkland Plaza v. Gerard
  Docket: 2009AP000331 11-11-09
  

  BROWN, C.J. This is a review of frivolous costs and fees determined by the circuit court pursuant to a remand directive by this court in Parkland Plaza Veterinary Clinic, S.C. v. Gerard, 2008 WI App 160, 314 Wis. 2d 507, 758 N.W.2d 225, review denied, 2009 WI 5, 315 Wis. 2d 57, 759 N.W.2d 772. In that opinion, this court noted that, even though the case against Anne Gerard had been dismissed in her favor, she nonetheless appealed. Parkland Plaza, 314 Wis. 2d 507, ¶1. The court determined that Gerard "should have known that a judgment in her favor with prejudice and on the merits, where no counterclaims were brought, would provide no basis in law or equity for an appeal and that she could not in good faith argue that the law should be changed to allow such an appeal." Id., ¶17. Now, on appeal from the circuit court's findings on frivolous fees and costs, Gerard reiterates many of her prior claims, accuses the remand court of denying her constitutional and legal rights and objects to the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm.
• Insurance/ Duty To Defend/ Contracts/ Negligence
  
  Camelot Development v. Jim Karrels Trucking
  Docket: 2009AP000592 11-11-09
  

  PER CURIAM. In this duty-to-defend case, Jim Karrels Trucking Sand & Gravel and Jim Karrels ("Karrels") appeal an order granting summary judgment to Acuity, a Mutual Company, Karrels' commercial general liability insurer. The circuit court concluded that Acuity owed Karrels no duty to defend against the breach of contract, negligence and slander of title claims Camelot Development Group, LLC ("Camelot") and CDG Belgium Grocery, LLC ("CDG") filed against Karrels. We agree and affirm.
• OWI/ Evidence/ Traffic Stops/ Constitutional Law Search & Seizure/ Reasonable Suspicion
  
  State v. Asunto
  Docket: 2009AP000722 11-11-09
  

  SNYDER, J. Thomas E. Asunto appeals from a judgment that followed his guilty plea to a charge of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, third offense, contrary to WIS. STAT. § 346.63(1)(a). Asunto contends that the circuit court erred when it denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained during an investigatory traffic stop. He contends that the stop was not based on reasonable suspicion and, therefore, violated his constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. We disagree and affirm the judgment.
• Small Claims/ Damages/ Evidence
  
  Terra Nova, Inc. v. Interpersonal Institute
  Docket: 2009AP001409 11-10-09
  

  FINE, J. Terra Nova, Inc., appeals a small-claims judgment entered after a trial de novo in circuit court awarding Interpersonal Institute, Inc., $4,995 on its counterclaim. The only issue on appeal is whether there was evidence to support the circuit court's award of damages to Interpersonal Institute. We affirm.
• TPR/ Statutes/ Notice
  
  Walworth County v. Jeanna R.
  Docket: 2009AP001952 11-11-09
  

  SNYDER, J. Walworth County Department of Health and Human Services appeals from an order dismissing the termination of parental rights petitions filed against Jeanna R. and Houston R. The County contends that the circuit court erred when it dismissed the petitions during the case-in-chief because the court incorrectly concluded that the required TPR warnings had not been provided to the parents. It argues that remand for further proceedings is required due to missing transcripts and an improperly timed motion to dismiss. We disagree and affirm.