On Point blog, page 2 of 2
Enhancers — § 939.62(2m), Persistent Offender — Comparable Crime, Foreign Conviction
State v. Charles J. Burroughs, 2002 WI App 18
For Burroughs: William F. Mross
Issue/Holding: Burroughs’ prior conviction in Alabama for assault with intent to murder is sufficiently comparable to attempted first degree intentional homicide so as to support exposure to persistent offender sentencing, § 939.62(2m)(c). ¶¶23-27.
Enhancer — § 939.62(2m)(d), Persistent Offender — Life Without Parole — Cruel and Unusual Punishment
State v. David M. Hahn, 2000 WI 118, 238 Wis. 2d 889, 618 N.W.2d 528, on certification; clarified on reconsideration, on a different point, 2001 WI 6
For Hahn: Steven G. Bauer
Issue: “(W)hether the persistent repeater penalty enhancer as applied to the defendant violates the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment.” ¶5.
Holding: Imposing a life sentence without possibility of parole,
Enhancer — Persistent Repeater, § 939.62(2m)(b) — Equal Protection Challenge
State v. Damone J. Block, 222 Wis. 2d 586, 587 N.W.2d 914 (Ct. App. 1998)
For Block: James M. Weber
Issue/Holding: The persistent repeater scheme survives equal protection challenge.
Block concedes that the persistent repeater statute deserves only the rational basis test. He argues that there are no reasonable or practical grounds for the manner in which the legislature has chosen serious crimes under § 939.62(2m),