On Point: D. Ineffective Assistance

State v. Johnny Ray Martin, 2023AP603, 5/28/25, District III (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

COA rejects Martin’s claims that the circuit court erroneously exercised its discretion by denying his attempt to impeach the alleged victim with her prior recantation of a separate incident, and that defense counsel was ineffective by failing to adequately investigate the recantation, prepare to address the recantation at trial, and argue the issue under the correct legal theory.

State v. Donaven C. Sprague, 2022AP876-CR, 5/20/25, District III (not recommended for publication), case activity

In the second defense win this week on appeal from a Barron County conviction (see Wooldridge), the COA vacated Donaven Sprague’s sentence to 10 years of initial confinement for repeated sexual assault of a child because the State breached its plea agreement to recommend no more than 5 years of initial confinement and did not cure the breach.  The Court also found that Sprague received ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel did not inform him that resentencing before a different judge was a remedy for the State’s breach.  The Court remanded the case directing the circuit court to schedule a resentencing for Sprague before a different judge.

Jacob Alan Powers v. Jon Noble, No. 24-2134, 3/25/25

The Seventh Circuit found that Jacob Powers was competent to stand trial in a Wisconsin court in 2006 for sexual assault of a child and child enticement.  Although Powers’ IQ was in the borderline/mild mental retardation range; his trial testimony, trial counsel’s decision not to challenge his competency, and two experts’ findings that he was competent convinced the Court that he reasonably understood the charges against him, trial procedures, and could assist his lawyer in his defense.  The Court therefore affirmed the district court’s order denying Powers’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 

William Thomas Hudson, III v. Sue DeHaan, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 23-2395, 2/11/25

Hudson was tried and convicted of conspiracy to commit first degree intentional homicide and of conspiracy to commit arson. After his convictions were affirmed on his direct appeal, Hudson filed a 974.06 postconviction motion alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call his sister as a witness and not investigating her potential testimony, and that his postconviction counsel was ineffective for failing to raise these claims.

Kenosha County DC&FS v. K.E.H., 2024AP1101, 2/26/25, District II (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

In a dense and fact-dependent appeal stemming from a TPR jury trial, COA applies strict legal standards in order to reject the appellant’s multiple claims of ineffectiveness.

State v. Jobert L. Molde, 2021AP1346-CR, petition for review of an unpublished court of appeals decision, granted 11/12/24; reversed 6/13/25; case activity

In a case that we correctly identified as SCOW bait, SCOW accepts review of the State’s petition for review asking to modify the substantive law on vouching as applied by COA. The case is also relevant to determining what is “settled law” in assessing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

State v. Percy Antione Robinson, 2020AP1728-CR, 8/6/24, District I (recommended for publication); case activity

In a published decision that criminal practitioners have been waiting on for years, COA holds that a CR-215 probable cause procedure used to satisfy the requirements of Riverside triggers the attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Rodney Lass v. Jason Wells, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals No. 23-2880, 6/26/24

Lass was charged with multiple felony counts after his first trial on misdemeanor domestic abuse charges ended in a mistrial. During state postconviction and appeal proceedings, he raised claims of vindictive prosecution, ineffective assistance, and violation of his 6th amendment rights. The 7th Circuit denied relief as to Lass’s IAC and 6th amendment claims as procedurally defaulted, and rejects the vindictive prosecution claim because the Wisconsin courts already considered and reasonably rejected Lass’s same “fact-based arguments.”

State v. Reynaldo Rosalez, 2022AP1929-CR, 6/11/24, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity

In a case illustrating the stringent standard of review used to assess findings of fact, COA dispatches with Rosalez’s claim that his lawyer failed to discuss a defense related to his alleged medication-induced amnesia.

State v. Jobert L. Molde, 2021AP1346-CR, 5/21/24, District III (not recommended for publication);petition for review granted case activity

Although this defense win is unpublished and therefore nonprecedential, COA’s analysis and synthesis of the law regarding this commonly litigated issue is an important read for litigators considering such claims.