PER CURIAM. We review a referee's report finding that Attorney Jennelle Joset engaged in professional misconduct with respect to her handling of three client matters. The referee recommended that Attorney Joset's license to practice law in Wisconsin be suspended for six months.

PER CURIAM. We review the stipulation filed by the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) and Attorney Lilah J. Zajac pursuant to SCR 22.12 wherein Attorney Zajac admits to the facts and professional misconduct as alleged by the OLR in its complaint. Attorney Zajac also assents to the level of discipline sought by the OLR director, a 60-day suspension of her license to practice law in Wisconsin.

PER CURIAM. PRN Associates LLC and PGN Associates LLC (collectively referred to as Prism) appeal a judgment dismissing their declaratory judgment action against the Department of Administration (DOA). Because we conclude that the circuit court lacked personal jurisdiction over DOA based on sovereign immunity, we affirm the judgment dismissing the action.

FINE, J. Edward U. Notz appeals, pursuant to our leave, a non-final order dismissing the first two claims of his three-claim amended complaint against the Everett Smith Group, Ltd., Thomas J. Hauske, Jr., Randall M. Perry, Anders Segerdahl, and Steven J. Hartung. Those two claims allege that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Notz. The Smith Group, Hauske, Perry, Segerdahl, and Hartung cross-appeal the circuit court's denial of their motion to dismiss Notz's third claim, which seeks dissolution of Albert Trostel & Sons Company. We reverse in part the circuit court's dismissal of the first two claims, and, because Notz no longer has standing to maintain his third claim, we vacate that part of the order denying the defendants' motion to dismiss that claim.

PER CURIAM. Terrance D. Prude appeals pro se from an order denying his postconviction motion brought under WIS. STAT. § 974.06 (2005­06), and from an order denying his motion to reconsider. The circuit court found that Prude's claims are procedurally barred. We affirm.

CURLEY, P.J. José Matamoros appeals from a judgment of conviction entered after a jury found him guilty of one count of armed robbery, one count of false imprisonment while using a dangerous weapon, and two counts of substantial battery while using a dangerous weapon, all as party to a crime, contrary to WIS. STAT. §§ 943.32(2), 940.30, 940.19(2), 939.63, and 939.05 (2003-04). On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress his custodial statements and when it excluded evidence related to a civil suit filed by a victim, which he contends violated his constitutional right to present a full defense. Because the record supports the trial court's findings that Matamoros received his Miranda warnings and knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived those rights, and because the trial court's decision to exclude testimony related to the victim's civil suit constituted harmless error, we affirm.

PER CURIAM. Troney Cross appeals from a corrected judgment of conviction for attempted first-degree intentional homicide as a party to the crime, and from a postconviction order summarily denying his motion for a new trial. The issue is whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to impeach a principal prosecutorial witness with his three prior convictions. We conclude that Cross has not established, in the context of the entire record, that trial counsel's failure to impeach that witness with his three prior convictions was prejudicial to the defense while considering that witness's multiple credibility problems and his role as the getaway driver who was not at the scene of the shooting. Therefore, we affirm.

ANDERSON, P.J. West Bend Mutual Insurance Company appeals from a summary judgment order granted in favor of Wisconsin Municipal Mutual Insurance Company. In 2001, West Bend's insured, Ryan R. Ellifson, was injured in an automobile accident. The accident occurred while Ellifson, a Kenosha county sheriff's deputy at the time, was acting within his scope as an employee of Kenosha county. After Ellifson settled with the other drivers, he sued West Bend alleging underinsured motorists (UIM) coverage. West Bend brought a third-party action against Wisconsin Municipal, Kenosha county's insurer, seeking a declaration that Wisconsin Municipal was Ellifson's primary UIM insurer. Wisconsin Municipal moved for summary judgment, which was granted by the circuit court. We affirm.

WEDEMEYER, J. David Rasmussen and Lisa A. Lindsay (hereinafter "Rasmussen") appeal from an order dismissing their action against Nissan Japan based on lack of personal jurisdiction. Rasmussen contends that the trial court erred in so ruling. He also appeals from a March 6, 2007 order denying his motion seeking to include the transcripts and exhibits, which were filed with the special master during the course of jurisdictional discovery. He asserts that this information is needed to establish prejudice resulting from the trial court's June 24, 2004 order denying Rasmussen's ability to compel jurisdictional discovery directly from Nissan Japan. Because the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it denied the motion to allow the inclusion of the transcripts and exhibits in the appellate record, we reverse that portion of that order, and direct the clerk of the circuit court to supplement the record with all of the materials which were filed with the special master during the course of jurisdictional discovery within fourteen days of the date of this opinion.

ANDERSON, P.J. Scott Frohmader appeals from a judgment finding him guilty of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant (third offense) as well as operating with a prohibited alcohol concentration (third offense). Frohmader believes the trial court erred in its instructions given to the jury because the instructions misled the jury. We disagree and therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.

FINE, J. Charlene A. Moon appeals a judgment convicting her on her guilty plea of operating a car under the influence of an intoxicant as a second offense. See WIS. STAT. §§ 346.63(1)(a); 346.65(2)(am)2; 343.307(1)(a). She claims that the deputy sheriffs who arrested her lacked probable cause for the arrest. We affirm.

PER CURIAM. Nancy Fandrick appeals from a judgment dismissing her personal injury claim against Waukesha Memorial Hospital on summary judgment. She argues that the discovery sanction excluding certain witnesses was a misuse of discretion and that under res ipsa loquitur her claim survives summary judgment. We affirm the judgment.