Case Title: City of Cedarburg v. Ries B. Hansen

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: wisconsin

Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Date: 2020-05-20T00:00:00Z

Document:
2020 WI 45 
 
SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE NO.: 
2018AP1129 
 
 
 
COMPLETE TITLE: 
City of Cedarburg, 
          Plaintiff-Appellant, 
     v. 
Ries B. Hansen, 
          Defendant-Respondent. 
 
 
 
 
 
ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 
Reported at 390 Wis. 2d 109,938 N.W.2d 463 
PDC No:2020 WI 11 - Published 
 
 
OPINION FILED: 
May 20, 2020   
SUBMITTED ON BRIEFS: 
        
ORAL ARGUMENT: 
        
 
 
SOURCE OF APPEAL: 
 
 
COURT: 
        
 
COUNTY: 
        
 
JUDGE: 
        
 
 
 
JUSTICES: 
 
PER CURIAM 
NOT PARTICIPATING: 
        
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS: 
 
 
For the plaintiff-appellant, there was a motion for 
reconsideration filed by Johnathan G. Wooward and Houseman & Feind, 
LLP, Gafton, WI. 
 
 
2020 WI 45 
 
NOTICE 
This opinion is subject to further 
editing and modification.  The final 
version will appear in the bound 
volume of the official reports.   
No.   2018AP1129 
(L.C. No. 
2017CV411) 
STATE OF WISCONSIN  
 
 
   : 
IN SUPREME COURT 
 
 
City of Cedarburg, 
 
          Plaintiff-Appellant, 
 
     v. 
 
Ries B. Hansen, 
 
          Defendant-Respondent. 
 
FILED 
 
MAY 20, 2020 
 
Sheila T. Reiff 
Clerk of Supreme Court 
 
 
 
 
 
MOTION for reconsideration.  Reconsideration granted. 
 
¶1 
PER CURIAM.  The City of Cedarburg moves the court to 
reconsider ¶30 of its decision in the above-captioned case, issued 
February 11, 2020.  See Wis. Stat. § 809.64 (2019-20).  The City 
contends the court overlooked State v. Braunschweig, 2018 WI 113, 
384 Wis. 2d 742, 921 N.W.2d 199, wherein the court unanimously 
decided that the proper burden of proof the State must satisfy to 
establish a defendant's prior OWI convictions is a preponderance 
of the evidence.  The City requests only that the court modify ¶30 
of our decision in City of Cedarburg v. Hansen to reflect the 
burden of proof announced in Braunschweig. 
No. 
2018AP1129   
 
2 
 
¶2 
We grant the City's motion for reconsideration to modify 
¶30.  Braunschweig established the proper burden of proof to be a 
preponderance of the evidence.  It noted that "in some PAC cases" 
under Wis. Stat. § 346.63, in which the text of the statute 
specifically makes "the predicate prior [] an element of the 
offense," the State must satisfy the higher, beyond a reasonable 
doubt burden.  Braunschweig, 384 Wis. 2d 742, ¶36 & n.18.  However, 
the court held that "the State's burden of proving the prior OWI 
conviction 
in 
second 
offense 
OWI-related 
offenses" 
is 
a 
preponderance of the evidence.  Id., ¶¶3, 32-40.  That burden of 
proof applies because a prior OWI offense is not among the 
statutory elements of a second offense OWI.  
See Wis. 
Stat. § 346.63(1)(a). 
¶3 
Accordingly, we order that ¶30 in City of Cedarburg v. 
Hansen, 2020 WI 11, 390 Wis. 2d 109, 938 N.W.2d 463, be modified 
to read as follows, with bold indicating the amended language and 
strikethrough indicating the language removed: 
A defendant's prior convictions determine his status as 
a repeat offender, not his guilt. State v. Saunders, 
2002 WI 107, ¶3, 255 Wis. 2d 589, 649 N.W.2d 263. 
However, the State must prove a defendant's status as a 
prior offender at sentencing, where prior convictions 
must be established by a preponderance of the evidence.  
See State v. Braunschweig, 2018 WI 113, ¶¶3, 32-40, 384 
Wis. 2d 742, 921 N.W.2d 199. beyond a reasonable doubt.13 
Id. Importantly, the city attorney is not required to 
allege or prove that the defendant had no prior offenses.   
¶4 
By the Court.—The motion for reconsideration to modify 
¶30 is granted. 
 
No. 
2018AP1129   
 
 
 
1