On Point blog, page 1 of 1
COA rejects pro se challenges to OWI conviction as procedurally barred, imposes sanctions for abuse of appellate process
State v. Robert E. Hammersley, 2022AP263, 1/4/24, District 3 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
This pro se appeal fails due to the well-settled application of a procedural bar against successive litigation.
Circuit court order “setting parameters” for future filings upheld
State v. William J. Buffo, 2023AP302 & 2023AP303, 8/31/23, District 4 (one-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity (including briefs)
This pro se appeal stems from two criminal cases, but the opinion concerns an order from the circuit court that set “parameters for Buffo’s future filings.” In short, the circuit court entered an order that barred Buffo from filing any further motions and required any potentially “legally-valid” postconviction motions to be screened by a “Dane County judge” before any filing from Buffo would be accepted. While noting that it could dismiss Buffo’s arguments on appeal as undeveloped, the court reaches the merits and upholds the circuit court’s order.
Inmate’s previous motions didn’t bar habeas petition challenging implementation of sentences
State ex rel. Gregory S. Gorak v. Michael Meisner, Warden, 2017AP39, District 1, 2/27/18 (not recommended for publication); case activity (including briefs)
The circuit court denied Gorak’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus after deciding it was procedurally barred because the issues it raised had already been litigated and decided. The court of appeals holds that is not the case.
State’s Waiver – Escalona-Naranjo (Serial Litigation) Argument
State v. James D. Miller, 2009 WI App 111, PFR filed 8/3/09
Pro se
Issue/Holding: State failure to argue, in the trial court, that Miller’s 974.06 motion was barred under Escalona-Naranjo waived the argument on appeal:
¶25 We conclude that application of the waiver rule is appropriate here, and therefore decline to address the State’s Escalona argument. Waiver is a rule of judicial administration,
Serial Litigation Bar (Escalona-Naranjo): Applicable to SVP Commitments
State v. Thomas H. Bush (II), 2004 WI App 193, reversed in part, 2005 WI 103
For Bush: Robert G. LeBell
Issue: Whether Bush, on appeal from denial of petition for release from SVP commitment, § 980.09(2), is procedurally barred from challenging the constitutionality of his underlying commitment because he could have raised such challenge in a prior appeal.
Holding:
¶13.