'Worthless' appendices in briefs will result in sanctions in Wisconsin.

• Date: 19 March 2007

Byline: David Ziemer

You must include transcripts in your appellate briefs, if they contain the trial court's reasoning. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals on Mar. 14 issued a $150 sanction against an attorney, and found that the rules of professional responsibility were violated when the attorney failed to include transcripts of the hearing and oral decision by the circuit court judge. Philip R. Bons was charged with possession of child pornography, after photographs were found in his car during a traffic stop. Bons moved to suppress the evidence on two grounds: that there was no reasonable suspicion justifying the officer's request to search the car; and that his consent to search the car was involuntary. The trial court denied the suppression motion, and Bons was convicted. Bons appealed, but the court of appeals affirmed in a decision written by Judge Daniel P. Anderson and joined by Judge Neal P. Nettesheim. Judge Richard S. Brown wrote a concurrence. After disposing of the merits of the appeal, the court imposed a sanction on Bons' attorney for $150, because the appendix failed to comply with Rule 809.19(2)(a). The rule provides that an appellant's appendix contain, "relevant trial court record entries, the findings or opinion of the trial court and limited portions of the record...