On Point blog, page 1 of 1
Name Change, Judgment of Conviction – Based on Claim of Common Law Right to Change Name
State v. Jermaine Smith, 2009 WI App 104
Pro se
Issue/Holding:
¶1 Jermaine Smith appeals from an order denying his “motion to amend his Judgment of Conviction to reflect his common law spiritual name,” which he states is “Marcolo Von Capoeira.” Because Smith’s motion fails to provide any support for his assertion that he used the name Marcolo Von Capoeira for ten years (including four years prior to the time his crime was committed) and because he did not raise this issue during his criminal case,
Motion to Reconsider – Basis, Generally
State v. Elizabeth A. White, 2008 WI App 96
For White: T Christopher Kelly
Issue/Holding:
¶8 To prevail on a motion for reconsideration, a party must either present newly discovered evidence or establish a manifest error of law or fact. Koepsell’s Olde Popcorn Wagons, Inc. v. Koepsell’s Festival Popcorn Wagons, Ltd., 2004 WI App 129, ¶44, 275 Wis. 2d 397,
Motion for Reconsideration – While (SVP) Appeal Pending
State v. Shawn D. Schulpius, 2004 WI App 39, PFR granted 4/20/04
For Schulpius: Ellen Henak, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate
Issue/Holding: Pendency of appeal doesn’t prevent trial court from hearing motion to reconsider, ¶33, n. 8:
Second, Schulpius argues that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to grant on November 29, 2000, the State’s motion for reconsideration because the case was then on appeal.
Motion to Reconsider Trial Ruling – Necessity to Raise “New Issue”
State v. Larry G. Edwards, 2003 WI 68, reversing unpublished summary order of court of appeals
For Edwards: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate
Issue: Whether, after the trial court dismissed a criminal case due to violation of intrastate detainer act time limits, the state’s motion for reconsideration was supported by a “new issue,” namely whether the dismissal was with prejudice.
Holding: “We conclude that the State raised a ‘new issue’
Motion to Reconsider Trial Court Ruling – Inherent Authority of Court to Entertain
State v. William L. Brockett, 2002 WI App 115, PFR filed 5/17/02
For Brockett: Hans P. Koesser
Issue/Hearing: The trial court has inherent authority to vacate or modify an order (including, as in this instance, on state’s motion). ¶¶13-15.
Motion to Reconsider Trial Ruling – Necessity of Separate Appeal
State v. Matthew J. Trecroci, Ryan J. Frayer, Ronnie J. Frayer, Scott E. Oberst, Amy L. Wicks, 2001 WI App 126, PFR filed 5/31/01
For defendants: Robert R. Henak
Issue: Whether a motion to reconsider injected sufficiently new issues into the case so as to require a separate notice of appeal to make the order denying that motion reviewable.
Holding:
¶22 In summary, when the basis for a reconsideration motion is a recent decision,