Court Opinion

ID: 9670794
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:26:19.234443+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:06.555030
License: Public Domain

GARTZKE, P.J.
(dissenting in part, concurring in part). Before holding that defendant may be found guilty of kidnapping under sec. 940.31(1), Stats., we should direct the parties to brief the question whether the legislature intends that statute to apply to defendant in view of the child abduction statute, sec. 948.30(2), Stats., which provides in relevant part:
Any person who, for any unlawful purpose, does any of the following is guilty of a Class B felony:
(a) By force or threat of imminent force, takes a child who is not his or her own by birth or adoption from the child's home or the custody of his or her parent, guardian or legal custodian. (Emphasis added.)
Here defendant acted to regain the children for his sister, the lawful custodian,1 while she waited in the car. The children were reunited with her upon reaching the car.
*413If defendant took his sister's children at her request to deliver them to her, and if she had the right to the children, defendant could not be prosecuted under sec. 948.30(2), Stats., because he lacked "an unlawful purpose." Nothing in sec. 948.30(2) suggests that how a child is taken deprives the purpose of lawfulness. Indeed, it contemplates that the abductor may take a child through "force or threat of imminent force" without violating the statute, so long as the abductor's purpose is not unlawful. He could, of course, be charged with other crimes, such as armed burglary (while concealing identity), committed in the course of that taking, whether or not he could be charged with abduction under sec. 948.30(2).
If defendant could not be charged with abduction under sec. 948.30(2), Stats., the question arises why he could be charged with kidnapping under sec. 940.31, Stats. It would seem odd that a defendant could not be charged with abduction, and yet could be charged under the general kidnapping statute.
Because the question has not been briefed, we should require furthér briefing. I therefore dissent from the majority's view that defendant can be found guilty under the kidnapping statute, not because I think that the majority is wrong but because the issue requires investigation. I join the majority opinion with respect to its resolution of the other issues.

 The mother has sole legal custody of the three children.