Refusal to Submit to Chemical Test, Matter of, No. 54
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin |
| Writing for the Court | CONNOR T. HANSEN |
| Citation | 234 N.W.2d 345,70 Wis.2d 220 |
| Docket Number | No. 54 |
| Decision Date | 28 October 1975 |
| Parties | In the Matter of REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO CHEMICAL TEST. STATE of Wisconsin, Respondent, v. Alfred POWELL, Appellant. (1974). |
Page 345
STATE of Wisconsin, Respondent,
v.
Alfred POWELL, Appellant.
Alfred Powell, defendant-appellant, was arrested on November 16, 1973, for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant, in violation of sec. 346.63(1)(a), Stats. He refused to submit to a chemical test for intoxication as provided in sec. 343.305. The trial judge found Powell's refusal to submit to the test to be unreasonable. The trial court also ordered that Powell's operating privileges be suspended for sixty days pursuant to sec. 343.305(7)(c). The suspension was stayed pending this appeal.
Thomas W. St. John and Robert H. Friebert, Milwaukee (Samson, [70 Wis.2d 221] Friebert, Sutton, Finerty & Burns, Milwaukee, of counsel), for appellant.
Robert W. Warren, Atty. Gen., Albert Harriman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Madison, for respondent.
CONNOR T. HANSEN, Justice.
On this appeal, Powell presents several issues which go to the merits of the trial court's finding that Powell's refusal to submit to the chemical test was unreasonable and to the order suspending the operating privileges for sixty days.
However, before this court can consider the merits of a controversy, it must first be established that we have appellate court jurisdiction.
Page 346
Neither party raised the issue of appealability in their briefs; nevertheless, it was raised at oral argument and the defendant subsequently responded in writing. Furthermore, parties cannot, either by failure to raise the question or by consent, confer jurisdiction upon an appellate court to review an order which is not appealable. Mitler v. Associated Contractors (1958), 3 Wis.2d 331, 333, 88 N.W.2d 672; In re Interest of F.R.W. (a minor) (1973), 61 Wis.2d 193, 212 N.W.2d 130, certiorari denied 416 U.S. 974, 94 S.Ct. 2000, 40 L.Ed.2d 563. In Mitler, supra, this court quoted from Jaster v. Miller (1955), 269 Wis. 223, 234, 69 N.W.2d 265, 271, as follows:
'Neither the waiver or consent of a respondent, nor the willingness of this court to consider a matter in the interests of justice, gives us authority to take jurisdiction where none is conferred by law.'
In the instant case the purported order which is the basis of this appeal was pronounced by the trial court from the bench. It, of course, appears in the transcript of the proceedings in court. The record also contains a one page printed form, denominated 'Minutes,' and [70 Wis.2d 222] captioned 'HEARING ON REFUSAL.' Some of the blank spaces on the form, including those provided for the name of the judge and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coleman v. Percy, No. 77-615
...jurisdiction to review an order which is not otherwise reviewable. See, e. g., In re Refusal to Submit to Chemical Test: State v. Powell, 70 Wis.2d 220, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975); Heritage Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thoma, 45 Wis.2d 580, 173 N.W.2d 717 (1970). It follows, therefore, that the Department a......
-
Orlando Residence, Ltd. v. Nelson , No. 2012AP1528.
...The transcript of the hearing does not satisfy the requirement that a written judgment or order be entered. See State v. Powell, 70 Wis.2d 220, 222, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975). We cannot hear the Nelsons' appeal of the issues raised at the hearing.November 5, 2010 Order ¶ 16 The circuit court is......
-
Popp's Estate, Matter of, No. 75-811
...be effective, insofar as it concerns the parties and the trial court, even though it has not been reduced to writing. State v. Powell, 70 Wis.2d 220, 222, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975); State ex rel. Hildebrand v. Kegu, 59 Wis.2d 215, 216, 207 N.W.2d 658 (1973). The judicial act is complete when th......
-
State v. Peterson, Appeal No. 2017AP1871
...1979). The transcript of the hearing does not satisfy the requirement that a written judgment or order be entered. See State v. Powell , 70 Wis. 2d 220, 222, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975).¶8 The circuit court orally denied Peterson’s WIS. STAT. § 974.06 motion at a June 23, 2017 hearing. Peterson s......
-
Coleman v. Percy, No. 77-615
...jurisdiction to review an order which is not otherwise reviewable. See, e. g., In re Refusal to Submit to Chemical Test: State v. Powell, 70 Wis.2d 220, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975); Heritage Mut. Ins. Co. v. Thoma, 45 Wis.2d 580, 173 N.W.2d 717 (1970). It follows, therefore, that the Department a......
-
Orlando Residence, Ltd. v. Nelson , No. 2012AP1528.
...The transcript of the hearing does not satisfy the requirement that a written judgment or order be entered. See State v. Powell, 70 Wis.2d 220, 222, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975). We cannot hear the Nelsons' appeal of the issues raised at the hearing.November 5, 2010 Order ¶ 16 The circuit court is......
-
Popp's Estate, Matter of, No. 75-811
...be effective, insofar as it concerns the parties and the trial court, even though it has not been reduced to writing. State v. Powell, 70 Wis.2d 220, 222, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975); State ex rel. Hildebrand v. Kegu, 59 Wis.2d 215, 216, 207 N.W.2d 658 (1973). The judicial act is complete when th......
-
State v. Peterson, Appeal No. 2017AP1871
...1979). The transcript of the hearing does not satisfy the requirement that a written judgment or order be entered. See State v. Powell , 70 Wis. 2d 220, 222, 234 N.W.2d 345 (1975).¶8 The circuit court orally denied Peterson’s WIS. STAT. § 974.06 motion at a June 23, 2017 hearing. Peterson s......