MICHAEL J. GABLEMAN, J. This case involves the discharge procedure for a person civilly committed as a sexually violent person under Wis. Stat. ch. 980 (2005-06). Daniel Arends was civilly committed in 2005 as a sexually violent person, and he petitioned for discharge under Wis. Stat. § 980.09 in 2007. The circuit court reviewed the petition for discharge and three reports discussing Arends' propensity for sexual violence and his treatment. The circuit court denied the petition, stating in a written order that "[t]he court does not find probable cause exists" to conduct a discharge hearing (a trial on the merits of the discharge petition). In a published opinion, the court of appeals reversed, concluding that the circuit court applied the wrong standard and that Arends had produced facts entitling him to a discharge hearing on his petition.

SHIRLEY S. ABRAHAMSON, C.J. This is a review of an unpublished decision of the court of appeals, which affirmed an order of the Circuit Court for Columbia County, James Evenson, Judge. The circuit court order granted Saddle Ridge Corporation's petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 70.47(13) (2007-08), and vacated the determination by the Board of Review of the Town of Pacific affirming a property tax assessment against Saddle Ridge.

PER CURIAM. In 2004, Salvatore J. Rizzo was convicted of repeatedly sexually assaulting the same child in violation of WIS. STAT. § 948.025(1) (1999-2000). Postconviction, the circuit court denied Rizzo's motion for an in camera review of the social services records relating to the victim and other involved persons. In State v. Rizzo, No. 2006AP1788-CR, unpublished slip op. (Wis. Ct. App. Oct. 17, 2007) (Rizzo I), we remanded to the circuit court "to conduct an in camera examination of the social services records and, if warranted, to disclose or release those records to Rizzo." Id., unpublished slip op. at ¶43. The circuit court conducted the required examination and based upon the records the court disclosed, Rizzo filed a WIS. STAT. RULE 809.30 (2007-08) postconviction motion alleging that the State failed to disclose exculpatory material as required by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). The circuit court denied the postconviction motion and Rizzo appeals. We agree with the circuit court that no Brady violation occurred, and that the social services records did not constitute newly discovered evidence. We affirm the order denying Rizzo's postconviction motion.

PER CURIAM. Jose Carman Gonzalez-Ricardo appeals from a judgment convicting him of first-degree sexual assault of a child under thirteen contrary to WIS. STAT. § 948.02(1)(e) (2007-08) and from an order denying his postconviction motion for a new trial due to an involuntary confession and the admission of other acts evidence. We conclude that the circuit court properly exercised its discretion when it admitted the other acts evidence, and we uphold its determination that Gonzalez-Ricardo's confession was voluntary. We affirm the judgment of conviction and the order denying postconviction relief.

CURLEY, P.J. Armando J. Castaneda appeals from judgments of conviction for one count of first-degree intentional homicide while armed, two counts of first-degree reckless homicide while armed, and three counts of attempted first-degree intentional homicide while armed, and the order denying his postconviction motion to withdraw his pleas. Castaneda argues that he should be allowed to withdraw his pleas because trial counsel who represented him at the hearing on his motion to suppress his confession was ineffective and because trial counsel who represented him when he sought to withdraw his guilty pleas prior to sentencing was ineffective for failing to raise as a reason for withdrawing his pleas the ineffectiveness of his attorney at the suppression hearing. We conclude that the denial of Castaneda's postconviction motion was proper and therefore affirm.

PER CURIAM. Sean P. Williams appeals from a judgment convicting him of maintaining a drug-trafficking place. His central challenge is that the court, the Honorable Faye M. Flancher presiding, denied his motion to withdraw his no-contest plea before sentencing. We agree with the trial court that Williams' explanation for wanting to withdraw his plea demonstrated a change of heart, not a fair and just reason. We affirm.

PER CURIAM. Raymon C. Mayfield appeals a judgment convicting him of felony murder/substantial battery. He also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion. Mayfield challenges his sentence, arguing that the court should have given more weight to the fact that the victim, Anthony Hess, taunted him with racial slurs. He also argues that the sentence was disproportionate to the crime. We affirm.

PER CURIAM. Timberline Cedar Werks, Inc. and Pekin Insurance, its worker's compensation insurer, appeal from a circuit court order affirming a decision of the Labor and Industry Review Commission (LIRC) that Ronald Costabile was entitled to worker's compensation benefits for temporary disability from January 1, 2007, through March 3, 2008. We conclude that LIRC's decision was supported by substantial and credible evidence, and we affirm the circuit court.

PER CURIAM. Jill Ardis appeals a summary judgment dismissing an objection to the admission of Norma Rankel's will on the grounds of undue influence. Ardis also appeals the appointment of Gary Rankel as personal representative, based on a contention that he improperly obtained survivorship rights in a joint account. We affirm.

BRENNAN, J. Plaintiffs Milwaukee Deputy Sheriff's Association and Milwaukee County Deputy Sheriff Scott Kuhtz (collectively, "Deputy Kuhtz" unless otherwise noted) appeal a summary judgment order granting Defendant City of Wauwatosa's motion for summary judgment and a second order denying the plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration of the summary judgment order. Deputy Kuhtz argues that the circuit court erred by: (1) holding that the City did not violate WIS. STAT. § 51.30(4) (2007-08) when the Wauwatosa Police Department released Deputy Kuhtz's statement of emergency detention to the Milwaukee County Sheriff's Department; and (2) holding that the Sheriff's Association does not have standing.

LUNDSTEN, J. Therese Kroll appeals pro se from an order of the circuit court dismissing her claim seeking money from her former husband for past expenses related to their children. I affirm the circuit court's order.

PER CURIAM. Abel Silva, pro se, appeals an order affirming both a prison disciplinary decision and transfer decision on certiorari review. Silva argues the disciplinary decision violated his First Amendment rights. Silva also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the disciplinary decision and further claims his transfer to a different institution violated his due process rights. Finally, Silva contends both the disciplinary and transfer decisions should be reversed due to the destruction of evidence. For the reasons discussed below, we reject Silva's arguments and affirm the order.

LUNDSTEN, J. This appeal concerns a negligence claim by Watertown Tire Recyclers against an insurance agent for the agent's alleged failure to procure a policy that protected Watertown against a substantial and anticipated risk, a stockpile tire fire. More specifically, Watertown alleged that the agent negligently procured a policy with a broad pollution exclusion that resulted in a denial of coverage after a serious accidental tire fire. After determining that the policy would have precluded coverage regardless of the alleged negligence, the circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of the agent. We affirm.

NEUBAUER, P.J. Jonathan Lebese appeals from a forfeiture judgment of conviction for violating City of Ripon ordinances prohibiting operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated (OWI) and operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of .10 or more (PAC). Lebese challenged the legality of the initial stop of his vehicle. He contends on appeal that the circuit court violated his due process rights when it issued a preliminary ruling on his motion to suppress prior to hearing the testimony of a defense witness. In light of the preliminary ruling, Lebese chose to forego calling his defense witness at a continued hearing. The circuit court ultimately found Lebese guilty of the cited offenses and assessed penalties on the PAC. We conclude that the circuit court's ruling at the suppression hearing did not violate Lebese's due process rights, but rather reflected a proper exercise of discretion. We therefore uphold the circuit court's denial of Lebese's motion to suppress and affirm the forfeiture judgment.

HOOVER, P.J. William Pari appeals a conviction for first offense operating while intoxicated. Pari argues the traffic stop was not supported by reasonable suspicion. We affirm.

PETERSON, J. Steven Reisman and PressEnter, LLP, appeal an order (1) directing Reisman and David Bushard to complete the wind-up of PressEnter, (2) requiring Reisman to reimburse PressEnter for funds he took as a salary, and (3) dismissing Reisman's counterclaims against Bushard for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. Reisman argues the circuit court erred by granting the order without resolving key factual issues or applying equitable principles to the dispute. We affirm.

BRENNAN, J. Mark Vasquez and the Milwaukee Police Association (collectively, "Vasquez" unless otherwise noted) appeal from a circuit court order and judgment affirming a decision of the Milwaukee City Board of Fire and Police Commissioners. The Board's decision terminated Vasquez's employment with the Milwaukee Police Department for violating Milwaukee City Charter § 5-02.1., requiring him to maintain his bona fide residence in the City of Milwaukee.

KESSLER, J. Andrew G. Busalacchi, Rainmaker Enterprises, Inc., and Andy Busalacchi Heating and Air Conditioning Corp. (referred to collectively as "Busalacchi" unless otherwise specifically identified), appeal from a judgment dismissing their third-party claims against Rundle-Spence Mfg. Co. Busalacchi argues that the trial court erroneously dismissed his claims for promissory estoppel, breach of contract, breach of warranty, equitable indemnification and equitable contribution from Rundle-Spence. We agree. Therefore, we reverse the summary judgment dismissing Busalacchi's claims against Rundle-Spence and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

DYKMAN, P.J. Randy Molini appeals from a judgment awarding Buswell Page Associates (BPA) specific performance of the real estate contract between Molini and BPA. Molini argues that the trial court erred in granting specific performance to BPA on summary judgment because (1) the trial court proceeded under the erroneous belief that it did not have discretion to deny specific performance; (2) there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether specific performance is equitable; (3) specific performance is not a proper remedy for a seller under a contract for the sale of real estate; (4) the doctrine of laches bars BPA's action for specific performance; and (5) the contract terminated as a matter of law when the parties did not meet the closing date under the contract. We reject each of these contentions, and affirm.

BROWN, C.J. This decision explores the interplay between the public trust doctrine and the regulation of high capacity wells, especially when citizens or conservancy organizations such as lake management districts perceive that a proposed well may adversely affect nearby navigable waters. We will go through our analysis in some detail, but for purposes of this introductory statement, it is enough to say the following: The statutes identify three types of water wells, differentiated by the quantity of water they consume--wells consuming 100,000 gallons per day (gpd) or less, wells consuming over 2,000,000 gpd and wells in-between. This case has to do with wells in-between. The parties dispute the role that the public trust doctrine plays with regard to the middling wells. The Village of East Troy says that, with certain statutorily defined exceptions, there is no role. Lake Beulah Management District and Lake Beulah Protective and Improvement Association claim that there is always a role such that the DNR is mandated to thoroughly investigate each proposed middling well for possible public trust doctrine implications. The DNR agrees with the District and the Association that the doctrine always plays a role but asserts that the comprehensiveness of the investigation is solely at its discretion. We agree with the DNR, but we also hold that the DNR misused its discretion here. We therefore reverse and remand with directions that the circuit court remand this case to the DNR for further proceedings. We also affirm a side issue and a cross-appeal.

PER CURIAM. Margo R. Hanson and Thomas J. Schwartzburg (Schwartzburg) have appealed from an order granting summary judgment to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) on the first claim of Schwartzburg's amended complaint. We affirm the order.

DYKMAN, P.J. Doreen Perez appeals from judgments entered against her in this consolidated negligence action arising out of a multiple-vehicle collision. Perez argues that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion in denying Perez's request to withdraw her admissions as to her liability for damages arising from the accident. We agree that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion, and therefore reverse and remand for the trial court to allow Perez to withdraw her admissions.