On Point blog, page 2 of 31
7th Circuit denies habeas relief to Wisconsin prisoner claiming vindictive prosecution, IAC and a 6th amendment violation
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.”
Seventh Circuit holds that habeas petitioner is not entitled to relief due to conflict of interest
Keith C. Henyard v. Cheryl Eplett, No. 22-3086, 4/26/24
Although Henyard argues that his conviction must be reversed because the lawyer who represented him was also the judicial official who bound him over for trial, the Seventh Circuit denies relief and holds that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals did not erroneously apply governing federal law.
HUGE Defense Win: 7th Circuit holds that SCOW’s decision is not entitled to AEDPA deference, calls Wisconsin’s treatment of petitioner a “travesty of justice” and grants writ
Robert J. Pope v. Je’Leslie Taylor, No. 23-2894, 5/6/24, affirming Pope v. Kemper, 21-CV-0346 (E.D. Wis. 9/1/23)
In a refreshing defense win that cuts through the procedural weeds and directly attacks the unjust nature of Pope’s treatment by Wisconsin’s appellate courts, the Seventh Circuit wastes no time in affirming the district court’s grant of the writ of habeas corpus.
Eastern District grants petition for writ of habeas corpus in case alleging inaccurate information at sentencing
Jared L. Spencer v. Michael Meisner, 21-cv-0326 (E.D. Wis. 4/26/24).
In an intriguing habeas win, the district court swats away the usual arguments about “reliance” and “harmlessness” in order to find that Spencer’s constitutional right to be sentenced on the basis of accurate information was violated.
Seventh Circuit denies habeas appeal alleging IAC for failure to seek in camera review of complainant’s medical records
Tony P. Rogers v. Jason Wells, Warden, No. 17-2903, 3/22/24
Although Rogers claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for not seeking records to impeach the credibility of his accuser in this sexual assault case, the Seventh Circuit court is unpersuaded that the high bar for habeas relief has been met and affirms the district court’s denial of the petition.
SCOW affirms denial of supervisory writ, seeks to clarify “preferred” appellate procedure to challenge denied substitution request
State ex rel. Antonio S. Davis v. Circuit Court for Dane County, the Honorable Ellen K. Berz and State of Wisconsin, 2024 WI 14, 3/26/24; case activity
A majority of the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirms the court of appeals’ denial of Davis’ petition for a supervisory writ after concluding the the circuit court had no “plain duty” to treat Davis’ request for substitution as timely under Wis. Stat. § 971.20(4). The court also uses the decision to clarify that a petition for a supervisory writ is not the preferred vehicle to seek appellate review of a circuit court’s denial of a request for substitution that was filed after arraignment. Op, ¶11.
COA affirms conviction despite trial judge’s “vocal opinions” about COA’s prior decision granting plea withdrawal
State v. Matthew Curtis Stills, 2022AP1390-CR, 2/13/24, District 1 (not recommended for publication); case activity
This 2016 case out of Milwaukee County has a bit of a backstory and an unfortunate ending for Sills. In 2020, the court of appeals reversed Sills’ conviction based on a Bangert violation related to the circuit court’s failure to advise Sills of the maximum fine. Thereafter, Sills went to trial, was convicted, and was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment, compared to the 15 years he received after his original plea. This time around, Sills raises two issues on appeal: (1) that trial court’s objective bias violated his right to a fair trial and (2) that his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel. Unlike his first appeal, the court affirms rejects his claims and affirms his new conviction.
Seventh Circuit denies habeas relief; holds that WI COA reasonably applied case law regarding invocation of right to remain silent
Johnnie Mertice Wesley v. Randall Hepp, No. 22-2968, 1/5/24
Wesley’s challenges to law enforcement conduct which resulted in him giving inculpatory statements fail, as the Seventh Circuit concludes that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals reasonably applied SCOTUS precedent.
Seventh Circuit holds that Wisconsin Court of Appeals did not unreasonably apply harmless error test
Deshawn Harold Jewell v. Gary Boughton, No. 22-3082, 1/22/24
Despite an obvious constitutional violation, Jewell is still precluded from obtaining a new trial given that Wisconsin courts did not unreasonably find the error harmless.
Federal court denies habeas relief for “sane but dangerous” NGI-acquittee; offers novel interpretation of Randall I
Graham L. Stowe v. Gregory Van Rybroek, 18-CV-400-wmc (W.D. Wis. 11/6/23).
Having recently prevailed on a judicial bias claim in state court, Stowe makes a return appearance to the blog on his 2018 federal habeas petition. Unfortunately, the Western District of Wisconsin denied the petition, which had been pending for close 5 years. The petition sought relief from the Wisconsin courts’ denial of his 2016 petition for conditional release under Wis. Stat. § 971.17(4)(d). In a novel reading of a nearly three-decades old Wisconsin Supreme Court decision, State v. Randall, 192 Wis. 2d 800, 532 N.W.2d 94 (1995) (“Randall I”), the federal court concludes that “one can reasonably read Randall I to require a showing of both mental illness and dangerousness.”