No. 95-1398

STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS

DISTRICT I

CITY OF MILWAUKEE,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v. ERRATA SHEET

CLIFTON HAMPTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

Marilyn L. Graves Clerk of Court of Appeals 231 East, State Capitol Madison, WI 53702

Peg Carlson Chief Staff Attorney 119 Martin Luther King Blvd. Madison, WI 53703-3330

Jennifer Krapf Administrative Assistant 119 Martin Luther King Blvd. Madison, WI 53703-3330

Court of Appeals, District II 2727 N. Grandview Blvd. Suite 300 Waukesha, WI 53188-1672

Court of Appeals, District III 740 Third Street Wausau, WI 54403-5784

Court of Appeals, District IV 119 Martin Luther King Blvd. Madison, WI 53703-3330

Hon. Kitty K. Brennan 901 N. 9th Str., Rm. 623 Milwaukee, WI 53233

Martin J. Donald City Attorney's Office 200 E. Wells Str., #800 Milwaukee, WI 53202

Hannah C. Dugan -and-

James A. Walrath

Legal Aid Society

229 E. Wisconsin Ave., #200

Milwaukee, WI 53202-4231

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the attached page 10 is to be substituted for page 10 in the above-captioned opinion which was released on July 31, 1996.

Dated this 20th day of December, 2006.

D. State Statutes and State Policy.

Hampton's last argument is that the “dangerous per se” language of the ordinance is in conflict with state law and state policy. We reject his argument.

Hampton claims the “dangerous per se” language in 105‑34 conflicts with the state statute governing evidentiary presumptions. See Rule 903.01, Stats.[1] Hampton argues that Rule 903.01 governs proceedings in municipal courts in Wisconsin, see § 800.08(4), Stats. (“Municipal courts shall be bound by the rules of evidence specified in chs. 901 to 911.”), and that it forbids irrebuttable mandatory presumptions. He then repeats his argument that the 105-34 “dangerous per se” language creates just such a presumption, and that this conflicts with Rule 903.01. We rejected his argument on this issue above, and therefore, we see no conflict with state law on this point. Further, Rule 903.01, Stats., does not even address irrebuttable mandatory presumptions.

---

[1] Rule 903.01, Stats., provides:

Presumptions in general. Except as provided by statute, a presumption recognized at common law or created by statute, including statutory provisions that certain basic facts are prima facie evidence of other facts, imposes on the party relying on the presumption the burden of proving the basic facts, but once the basic facts are found to exist the presumption imposes on the party against whom it is directed the burden of proving that the nonexistence of the presumed fact is more probable than its existence.