On Point: 36. Sentencing

Manitowoc County HSD v. K.H., 2024AP1717, District II, 12/23/25, 1-judge decision ineligible for publication; case activity (including briefs)

COA dismisses as moot an appeal from the circuit court’s order that resulted in K.H. serving 20 days of a remedial sanction for contempt of court.

State v. David T. Waits, 2023AP1592 and 2023AP1593, 12/23/25, District III (ineligible for publication); case activity

The COA affirmed an award of restitution to the victim of a hit and run although the defendant was not allowed to introduce evidence of the victim’s contributory negligence and the victim’s preexisting conditions aggravated her injuries.

State v. Matthew John Flynn, 2024AP2306-CR, 12/17/25, District II (ineligible for publication); case activity

Flynn appeals his operating while intoxicated, third offense, conviction and an order denying his collateral attack motion. He argues that the circuit court erred in denying his motion because he alleged sufficient facts to suggest that the prior conviction did not rest upon a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of his right to counsel. COA affirms.

State v. Brian Tyrone Ricketts, Jr.,  2024AP2291-CR, 12/9/25, District III (recommended for publication); case activity

Following on the heels of the recent litigation as to the meaning of “separate occasions” that reached SCOW in the Rector case, COA holds that two charges in the same case constitute “separate occasions” for the purposes of the domestic abuse repeater.

State v. Angela R. Joski, 2023AP1371-CR, 10/29/25, District II (recommended for publication); case activity

The state appealed Joski’s early release under Wis. Stat. § 973.195, arguing that pursuant to State v. Gramza, 2020 WI App 81, ¶24, 395 Wis. 2d 215, 952 N.W.2d 836, Joski must fully serve the mandatory minimum three-year term of initial confinement prescribed by Wis. Stat. § 346.65. COA agrees due to Gramza‘s interpretation, and reverses.

State of Wisconsin ex rel. Christopher P. Kawleski v. State, 2022AP1129, 7/3/25, District IV, (recommended for publication); case activity

COA recommends publication in a case addressing how to calculate the maximum discharge date for a defendant sentenced to a bifurcated sentence on a felony between 1999 and 2003 upon release from reconfinement after extended supervision was revoked.

State v. C.J.L.,  2024AP1917, 7/3/25, District IV (1-judge decision, ineligible for publication); case activity

C.J.L. contests part of the restitution ordered in his juvenile case related to a theft and break in at a dance studio–restitution for a surveillance subscription purchased after the theft, and for damages to the studio’s dance floor. Because the juvenile statute, Wis. Stat. § 938.34(5)(a), permits restitution for physical injury to a person or damage to property only, the COA agrees with C.J.L. and reverses the restitution order.

Curtis L. Walker v. Dan Cromwell, No. 23-2240, 6/16/25

Despite making a “strong case for relief” that his de-facto life sentence for a homicide committed when he was 17 violated the Eighth Amendment, the Seventh Circuit held that Curtis Walker’s habeas petition could not overcome the heavy burden imposed by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to show that the state court decision was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court because the Court’s precedents were not “a model of clarity.”

State v. Scott R. Dachelet, 2023AP970, 6/25/25, District II (recommended for publication); case activity

Wisconsin’s seemingly straightforward sentence credit statute – Wis. Stat. § 973.155(1)(a) – is required to accommodate an infinite variety of scenarios.  Here, the COA addressed whether a defendant is entitled to sentence credit on a withheld sentence where probation was revoked while also receiving credit for an imposed and stayed sentence that was revoked.  Because lifting the stay on the imposed and stayed sentence severed the connection between the defendant’s custody and the case for which his sentence was withheld, the Court found that he was not entitled to dual sentence credit.

State v. Benny Burgos, 2024AP1497-CR, 6/3/25, District I (not recommended for publication); case activity

In an interesting appeal presenting questions of statutory construction and appellate jurisdiction, COA uses principles of equity to reach the merits and reverses in Burgos’s favor.