Objection to Admission of Evidence Wisconsin Case Law
"Objections to the admissibility of evidence must be made promptly and in terms which inform the circuit court of the exact grounds upon which the objection is based.
Moreover, an objection preserves for appeal only the specific grounds stated in the objection." State v. Hartman, 145 Wis. 2d 1, 9, 426 N.W.2d 320, 323 (1988) (citation omitted);
see also Wis. Stat. Rule 901.03(1)(a) (a party must make a specific and timely objection to the admission of evidence in order to preserve the issue for appeal).
"The party raising an issue on appeal has the burden of establishing, by reference to the record, that the issue was raised before the circuit court." See State v. Caban, 210 Wis. 2d 597, 604, 563 N.W.2d 501, 505 (1997).
Moreover, hearsay evidence is competent and admissible unless an objection is placed on the record. See State v. Heredia, 172 Wis. 2d 479, 482 n.1, 493 N.W.2d 404, 406 n.1 (Ct. App. 1992).
In State v. Agnello, 226 Wis. 2d 164, 593 N.W.2d 427 (1999) the voluntariness of Agnello's confession was at issue, and the State questioned Agnello regarding the truth of the confession. See id., 226 Wis. 2d at 167-170, 593 N.W.2d at 428-429.
Agnello objected, asserting that the answer to the question was not relevant. See id., 226 Wis. 2d at 170, 593 N.W.2d at 429.
Although Agnello failed to explain that his relevance objection was based on legal authority holding that the truth of a confession is not relevant to the determination of whether the confession was voluntary, the court held that the relevance objection was sufficient to preserve for appeal the challenge to the prosecutor's line of questioning. See id., 226 Wis. 2d at 173-176, 593 N.W.2d at 431-432.