611


           SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT DECISIONS OF THE
   SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN
                             October 1982 - September 1984
                                      Bruce Feustel
                             LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE BUREAU
  In Wisconsin, there are 2 appellate courts: the Court of Appeals and the
Supreme Court.
Appellate cases are heard by the Court of Appeals unless a case "bypasses"
that court. There are
no appeals to the Supreme Court as a matter of right, but a litigant may
petition the Supreme
Court to review a decision of the Court of Appeals.
  The purpose of these summaries is to show some examples of the issues facing
these appellate
courts, especially cases in which the courts are breaking new ground, the
litigants are represent-
ing important competing policy interests, the facts are unusual, the public
is greatly affected by
the outcome or there is a strong division of opinion among the justices or
judges.
  The following summaries of appellate decisions are not an attempt to provide
a complete
report of the precise findings for the cases listed. Rather, the summaries
show the variety of
issues and problems that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals and the Wisconsin
Supreme Court
have confronted.


                               CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
 Journalist Privilege - Confidentiality of News Sources
   When is a reporter or journalist justified in refusing to name his or
her sources or informants?
 What is the procedure that should be used to determine if and how the journalist
should make
 disclosures? The Supreme Court faced these questions in Green Bay Newspaper
v. Circuit Court,
 113 Wis. 2d 411 (1983).
   In the summer of 1982, the Green Bay Press-Gazette included some news
articles regarding an
 investigation of the death of David Moureau. After the investigation, murder
charges were
 brought against 2 persons. In the course of pretrial motions in the criminal
cases, the Circuit
 Court Judge ordered local news media to submit copies of news articles and
transcripts of broad-
 casts to defendants' lawyers.
   When the articles of the Green Bay Press-Gazette were reviewed, the judge
subpoenaed the
 reporters at the request of one of the defendants. The reporters sought
to quash (vacate) the
 subpoena because they had promised confidentiality to their sources and
the reporters felt they
 were privileged to refuse to disclose the sources.
   After further motions and hearings, the Circuit Court Judge ordered the
reporters to name
 their sources. When they refused, the judge found them in contempt of court
and imposed a $500
 fine and a 30-day jail sentence.
   The reporters appealed and, upon bypass of the Court of Appeals, the Supreme
Court re-
 viewed the case. Justice Day, writing for a unanimous court, noted initially
that a journalist has
 a qualified, not an absolute, privilege to protect confidential sources.
   The basis for the journalist privilege is found in Article I, section
3, of the Wisconsin Constitu-
 tion which provides that:
        "Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments
on all subjects,
     being responsible for the abuse of that right, and no laws shall be
passed to restrain or
     abridge the liberty of speech or of the press."
 The journalist privilege is qualified, however, because there are constitutional
and societal rea-
 sons which favor disclosure. The right of the journalist to protect confidential
sources must be
 balanced against the right of the criminal defendant to subpoena witnesses
who can offer rele-
 vant evidence on his or her behalf.
   The Supreme Court had never previously decided what the proper procedure
was to balance
 these competing interests. Justice Day described the procedure as a series
of steps. The journal-
 ist must first show that he or she is entitled to the qualified privilege:
that the person is a journalist
 and that the information was given in confidence.