missy1974
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 10,142
- Reaction score
- 31,355
Welcome back everyone!
Zellner was due to file the appeal on Feb 1st I believe. Instead on January 24th she filed another motion to stay and remand on a new issue.
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/filings/14/motion-of-stay-of-appeal--filing-2019-01-24_tdbVX2e.pdf
Undersigned counsel has uncovered the State's violation of Wis. Stat. § 968.2.05 where it failed to (1) preserve certain suspected human bone evidence and (2) notify Mr. Avery and his attorneys of recol·d of its intent to destroy such evidence. Mr. Avery hereby moves for a :remand to the circuit court to conduct proceedings consistent with the claim alleged herein.
The State responded January 29/19:
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/filings/14/additional/state-response-2019-01-29.pdf
Defense replied Feb 1/19 :
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/filings/14/additional/defendant-reply-2019-02-01.pdf
Defense Supplemented the motion on Feb 11/19:
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/fi...endant-supplemental-re-2019-02-11_WJWYWjU.pdf
Defense again Supplemented the motion on Feb 13/19... this one is good LOL :
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/fi...endant-supplemental-re-2019-02-13_S5ubT7C.pdf
One state attorney(Williams) called another state attorney (Fallon)... only problem, he dialed KZ's cell number and left a message intended for Fallon.
Decision from the CoA's on Feb 25/19:
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/Feb25_Decision.pdf
The State has filed an objection to Avery’s remand motion on the ground that it constitutes “a new and separate action” which is unrelated to the orders Avery presently appeals, is unnecessary to the resolution of his pending appeal, and “would result in unnecessary delay and litigation.” The State’s objection points out that this is, in effect, Avery’s third remand request. The State’s objection does not address the merits of Avery’s claimed statutory and constitutional violations, and it has not responded to Avery’s supplemental filings alleging the possible destruction of evidentiary items which, it appears, the parties previously agreed to preserve.
Zellner must file 14 days from the date on the order, March 11th I believe.
Zellner was due to file the appeal on Feb 1st I believe. Instead on January 24th she filed another motion to stay and remand on a new issue.
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/filings/14/motion-of-stay-of-appeal--filing-2019-01-24_tdbVX2e.pdf
Undersigned counsel has uncovered the State's violation of Wis. Stat. § 968.2.05 where it failed to (1) preserve certain suspected human bone evidence and (2) notify Mr. Avery and his attorneys of recol·d of its intent to destroy such evidence. Mr. Avery hereby moves for a :remand to the circuit court to conduct proceedings consistent with the claim alleged herein.
The State responded January 29/19:
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/filings/14/additional/state-response-2019-01-29.pdf
Defense replied Feb 1/19 :
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/filings/14/additional/defendant-reply-2019-02-01.pdf
Defense Supplemented the motion on Feb 11/19:
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/fi...endant-supplemental-re-2019-02-11_WJWYWjU.pdf
Defense again Supplemented the motion on Feb 13/19... this one is good LOL :
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/fi...endant-supplemental-re-2019-02-13_S5ubT7C.pdf
One state attorney(Williams) called another state attorney (Fallon)... only problem, he dialed KZ's cell number and left a message intended for Fallon.
Decision from the CoA's on Feb 25/19:
https://www.workwithkz.com/media/Feb25_Decision.pdf
The State has filed an objection to Avery’s remand motion on the ground that it constitutes “a new and separate action” which is unrelated to the orders Avery presently appeals, is unnecessary to the resolution of his pending appeal, and “would result in unnecessary delay and litigation.” The State’s objection points out that this is, in effect, Avery’s third remand request. The State’s objection does not address the merits of Avery’s claimed statutory and constitutional violations, and it has not responded to Avery’s supplemental filings alleging the possible destruction of evidentiary items which, it appears, the parties previously agreed to preserve.
Zellner must file 14 days from the date on the order, March 11th I believe.