On Point blog, page 41 of 97
State v. Rogelio Guarnero, 2013AP1753-CR & 2013AP1754-CR, petition for review granted 11/14/14
Review of a published court of appeals decision; case activity: 2013AP1753-CR; 2013AP1754-CR
Issue (composed by On Point)
Does Guarnero’s conviction for violating the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act qualify as a prior offense under the repeat drug offender enhancement provision of § 961.41(3g)(c) because the RICO conviction’s predicate acts involved, among other things, controlled substance offenses, thus making the RICO conviction a conviction for a crime “under a statute … relating to controlled substances”?
State v. Andrew M. Obriecht, 2013AP1345-CR, petition for review granted 11/14/14
Review of a published court of appeals decision; case activity
Issue (composed by On Point)
When additional sentence credit is granted after an offender’s parole has been revoked, is the additional credit applied to the offender’s term of reincarceration, or to the remaining period of parole?
Court of appeals “sympathizes” with angst of dedicated criminal defense lawyers?!
State v. David M. Carlson, 2014 WI App 124; case activity
Note to trial courts: When ineffective assistance of counsel claims are based what trial counsel said to his client, hold an evidentiary hearing. Note to defense counsel: Data showing the sentences received by defendants charged with the same crimes as your client is about as useful as data showing a patient diagnosed with a lethal illness the survival rates of similarly-diagnosed patients. Note to all: A single, inaccurate, hyperbolic remark during the course of a long sentencing explanation is harmless even if the trial court relied upon it.
OWI was properly charged as a first offense because prior was more than 5 years old
City of Kaukauna v. Grant R. Loescher, 2014AP954, District 3, 11/4/14 (1-judge decision; ineligible for publication); case activity
Loescher’s 1997 conviction for first-offense OWI is not void because it was properly counted as a first offense despite his OWI conviction in 1992.
Counsel wasn’t ineffective for waiving prelim and not moving to suppress statement
State v. Isaiah N. Triggs, 2014AP204-CR, District 1, 10/28/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity
Trial counsel wasn’t ineffective for waiving a preliminary hearing in Triggs’s homicide prosecution or for failing to move to suppress Triggs’s confession. Further, the circuit court’s plea colloquy with Triggs was not defective and the circuit court didn’t erroneously exercise its sentencing discretion.
Sentencing court didn’t improperly rely on defendant’s immigration status
State v. Leopoldo R. Salas Gayton, 2013AP646-CR, District 1, 10/7/14 (not recommended for publication), petition for review granted 11/4/15, affirmed, 2016 WI 58; case activity
The sentencing court didn’t erroneously exercise its discretion by relying in part on Gayton’s immigration status or by failing to explain its reasons for imposing the maximum term of initial confinement and the DNA surcharge.
Records that support claims defense counsel made at sentencing not enough to merit resentencing or sentence modification
State v. Anthony Herman Williams, 2014AP447-CR & 2014AP448-CR, District 1, 9/30/14 (not recommended for publication); case activity: 2014AP447-CR; 2014AP448-CR
Cell phone records that corroborate a claim Williams’s trial lawyer made at sentencing regarding contact between Williams and the victims don’t show that the sentencing court relied on inaccurate information because the records do little to corroborate the contact or support Williams’s version of events.
State v. Jesse Herrmann, 2013AP197-CR, petition for review granted 9/24/14
On review of a per curiam unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity
Issue (composed by On Point)
Did the circuit court violate Jesse Herrmann’s due process right to an impartial judge by exhibiting objective bias in sentencing Herrmann?
Defendant allowed dual credit for presentence custody served for a burglary and an unrelated civil commitment
State v. Joseph T. Trepanier, 2014 WI App 105; case activity
This case presents an issue of first impression: Whether a defendant is entitled to sentence credit for time spent in presentence custody for a burglary when he was also in custody pursuant to an unrelated civil commitment for contempt of court. The State, naturally, opposed dual sentence credit. But the winner is . . . the defendant!
Lengthy imposed and stayed sentence wasn’t unduly harsh or excessive
State v. Britton D. McKenzie, 2014AP314-CR, District 4, 8/28/14 (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activity
Consecutive jail sentences totaling 24 months were not unduly harsh and excessive.