An Oconto County judge planned to issue a written decision whether three separate files against a Suring man may go to the same jury.
Prosecutors filed a motion asking to combine the cases in a single trial or, alternatively, to permit the jury to hear about the other cases against Michael James Bullock, 41. He was arrested in Texas last summer after he allegedly fled the state to avoid a pending trial on child sexual assault charges.
Bullock is scheduled to stand trial Sept. 16-18, with a final pre-trial conference set for Sept. 2.
Judge Michael Judge heard arguments April 28 regarding the motion brought by District Attorney Hannah Schuchart and a response written by defense attorney Eric Maciolek.
Bullock was charged in July 2022 with two counts of the repeated sexual assault of the same child in connection with alleged incidents involving two females dating back to when they were between the ages of 12 and 16.
Two months later, he was charged with three counts of invading privacy by using a surveillance device against a victim younger than 18, along with three counts of capturing an intimate representation in connection with an allegation Bullock positioned a hidden camera in a bathroom and recorded intimate video of a teenaged girl showering.
The third file charges Bullock with felony bail jumping. He was scheduled to stand trial starting July 31, 2024, and was free on bail with a condition that he wear an ankle bracelet. He is accused of slipping out of the bracelet on July 2 and leaving the state.
The criminal complaint in that case alleges Bullock was spotted at an RV park in Texas two weeks later by a concerned citizen who happened to see an Oconto County Sheriff’s Office social media post asking for information about the suspect’s whereabouts.
Both the prosecution and defense arguments cite state law that says combining cases, also known as joinder, is proper when the alleged offenses are part of the same act or transaction, when they share the same or similar characteristics or when they constitute a common scheme or plan.
The prosecution argues that the invasion of privacy case can be properly joined with the child sexual assault case because they are acts of a similar character.
“All three cases are properly joined as offenses that are ‘connected together’ or ‘part of a common scheme or plan,’” Schuchart said.
The bail jumping case shows that Bullock clearly intended to “obstruct justice (and) avoid punishment” by leaving the state, she said.
“Fleeing evidence is highly probative, and the highly probative value is not substantially outweighed by its unfair prejudice,” Schuchart said.
Maciolek countered that prosecutors want to merge three distinct criminal prosecutions into a single trial.
“Joinder in this case would be more prejudicial than probative,” he said.
Trying the cases together would conflate separate incidents into a generalized “bad character” narration, Maciolek argued.
Judge said he plans to issue a written decision in the near future. He scheduled a review of the case for May 9.
wbluhm@newmedia-wi.com
Scope of Bullock trial considered
